§

L-Com, Inc. v.Elecom Co., Ltd.

No. 91192293 (T.T.A.B. Aug. 3, 2011)
L-Com, Inc. v.Elecom Co., Ltd.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Gasser Chair Co. v. Infanti Chair Manufacturing Corp.

    60 F.3d 770 (Fed. Cir. 1995)   Cited 122 times
    Holding that the trigger for delay begins when the plaintiff's "right ripens into one entitled to protection"

  2. In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 190 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"

  3. Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Group

    637 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2011)   Cited 27 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Considering "corporate studies tracking awareness of the CITIBANK mark"

  4. Opryland USA v. Great American Music Show

    970 F.2d 847 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 24 times
    In Opryland, Opryland USA opposed the registration of "THE CAROLINA OPRY," arguing that the term was confusingly similar to Opryland's own marks.

  5. Lloyd's Food Products, Inc. v. Eli's, Inc.

    987 F.2d 766 (Fed. Cir. 1993)   Cited 18 times
    Holding that third-party evidence should not be disregarded in evaluating the strength of a mark for purposes of determining the likelihood of confusion

  6. Olde Tyme Foods, Inc. v. Roundy's, Inc.

    961 F.2d 200 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 12 times
    Stating that "[a]s to strength of a mark . . . [third-party] registration evidence may not be given any weight . . . [because they are] not evidence of what happens in the market place"

  7. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 336,610 times   161 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit