§

IdaTech, LLC

No. 76369815 (T.T.A.B. Apr. 19, 2004)
IdaTech, LLC

7 Cited authorities

  1. Abercrombie Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, Inc.

    537 F.2d 4 (2d Cir. 1976)   Cited 818 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the term "Safari" is generic for the articles of clothing that comprise the "Safari suit" outfit

  2. In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, Smith

    828 F.2d 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 58 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding applicant's incontestable registration of a service mark for "cash management account" did not automatically entitle applicant to registration of that mark for broader financial services

  3. In re Hutchinson Technology Inc.

    852 F.2d 552 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 19 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the issue presented by a composite mark consisting of personal names is "what the purchasing public would think when confronted with the mark as a whole"

  4. Bose Corp. v. International Jensen Inc.

    963 F.2d 1517 (Fed. Cir. 1992)

    No. 91-1260. May 13, 1992. Charles Hieken, Fish Richardson, Boston, Mass., argued for appellant. Heidi A. Schiller, Choate, Hall Stewart, Boston, Mass., argued for appellee. With her on the brief was Toby H. Kusmer, of Schiller Kusmer. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of United States Patent and Trademark Office. Before ARCHER, LOURIE and ALARCON, Circuit Judges. Honorable Arthur L. Alarcon, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation. ALARCON, Circuit

  5. The Driving Force, Inc. v. Manpower, Inc.

    538 F. Supp. 57 (E.D. Pa. 1982)   Cited 7 times
    Lifting a primary jurisdiction stay despite pending appeal of agency determination because the issues before the court were broader than the matters before the agency's appellate body

  6. Application of Automatic Radio Mfg. Co.

    404 F.2d 1391 (C.C.P.A. 1969)   Cited 18 times

    Patent Appeal Nos. 7994, 7995. January 16, 1969. David Wolf, Wolf, Greenfield Hieken, Boston, Mass., for appellant. Joseph Schimmel, Washington, D.C. (Raymond E. Martin, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for the Commissioner of Patents. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, SMITH, ALMOND, and BALDWIN, Judges. RICH, Judge. These are two ex parte trademark appeals from decisions of the Patent Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board covered in a single opinion, 150 USPQ 70, and argued together in this

  7. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,611 times   274 Legal Analyses
    Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"