§

MW Soft, Inc.

No. 76177458 (T.T.A.B. Oct. 20, 2003)
MW Soft, Inc.

5 Cited authorities

  1. In re Pacer Technology

    338 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 47 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 02-1602. DECIDED: August 4, 2003. Appeal from the Court of Appeals, Gajarsa, Circuit Judge. Thomas E. Schatzel, Law Offices of Thomas E. Schatzel, of Los Gatos, California, argued for appellant. Raymond T. Chen, Associate Solicitor, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Arlington, Virginia, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were John M. Whealan, Solicitor; and Cynthia C. Lynch, Associate Solicitor. Before LOURIE, GAJARSA, and LINN, Circuit Judges. GAJARSA

  2. Application of Abcor Development Corp.

    588 F.2d 811 (C.C.P.A. 1978)   Cited 36 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Abcor, the question before the court was whether applicant's alleged mark (GASBADGE) was "merely descriptive" within the meaning of § 2(e)(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).

  3. In re Gyulay

    820 F.2d 1216 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 14 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the Board did not err in affirming the examiner's prima facie case that the mark was merely descriptive

  4. Application of Thunderbird Products Corp.

    406 F.2d 1389 (C.C.P.A. 1969)   Cited 8 times

    Patent Appeal Nos. 8084, 8085. March 6, 1969. Eugene F. Buell, Buell, Blenko Ziesenheim, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant. Joseph Schimmel, Washington, D.C. (Joseph F. Nakamura, Washington, D.C., of counsel) for the Commissioner of Patents. [Oral argument January 9, 1969 by Mr. Buell and Mr. Nakamura] Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN and KIRKPATRICK, Judges. Senior District Judge, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. RICH, Judge. These two appeals from decisions

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,605 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"