§

SL&E Training Stable, Inc.

No. 78806669 (T.T.A.B. Sep. 4, 2008)
SL&E Training Stable, Inc.

14 Cited authorities

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

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 190 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"

  2. Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America

    970 F.2d 874 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 39 times
    Finding similarity between "CENTURY 21" and "CENTURY LIFE OF AMERICA" in part because "consumers must first notice th[e] identical lead word"

  3. Octocom Systems v. Houston Computer Services

    918 F.2d 937 (Fed. Cir. 1990)   Cited 28 times

    No. 90-1196. November 2, 1990. Brian M. Dingman, Law Offices of Joseph S. Iandiorio, Waltham, Mass., argued for appellant. With him on the brief was Joseph S. Iandiorio. J. Paul Williamson, Arnold, White Durkee, Arlington, Va., argued for appellee. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before NIES, Chief Judge, ARCHER and CLEVENGER, Circuit Judges. NIES, Chief Judge. Octocom Systems, Inc. (OSI), appeals from the final decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark

  4. In re Majestic Distilling Co., Inc.

    315 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 12 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that malt liquor and tequila sold under the same mark would cause a likelihood of confusion

  5. Johnny's Fine Foods, Inc. v. Johnny's Inc.

    No. 1:01-0107 (M.D. Tenn. Oct. 2, 2003)   Cited 10 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding one-year Tennessee Consumer Protection Act statute of limitations applies to Lanham Act trade dress infringement claims

  6. Nina Ricci, S.A.R.L. v. E.T.F. Enterprises, Inc.

    889 F.2d 1070 (Fed. Cir. 1989)   Cited 15 times
    Holding that VITTORIO RICCI and NINA RICCI are similar

  7. Henegan Construction Co. v. Heneghan Contracting Corp.

    No. 00 Civ. 9077 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y. May. 31, 2002)

    No. 00 Civ. 9077 (JGK) May 31, 2002 OPINION AND ORDER JOHN G. KOELTL, United States District Judge. This case involves a dispute over whether the defendant, Heneghan Contracting Corporation, which began doing business in 1999, has the right to use its president's and founder's true family name, Heneghan, in connection with its provision of concrete and masonry subcontracting services for commercial construction projects in the New York area. The plaintiff, Henegan Construction Company, Inc., has

  8. M. Fabrikant Sons v. Fabrikant Fine Diamonds

    17 F. Supp. 2d 249 (S.D.N.Y. 1998)   Cited 2 times
    Enjoining seller from using his surname "Fabrikant," which was registered trademark owned by plaintiff, unless it was preceded by seller's first name in same size, color, type and conspicuousness

  9. SquirtCo v. Tomy Corp.

    697 F.2d 1038 (Fed. Cir. 1983)   Cited 12 times
    Rejecting argument that SQUIRT SQUAD in standard letters is distinct from SQUIRT registered in “distinctive lettering on a dark medallion”; “[b]y presenting its mark merely in a typed drawing, a difference cannot legally be asserted by that party”

  10. Federated Foods v. Fort Howard Paper Co.

    544 F.2d 1098 (C.C.P.A. 1976)   Cited 16 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the mere existence of modern supermarket containing wide variety or products should not foreclose further inquiry into the likelihood of confusion arising from the use of similar marks on any goods so displayed

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,607 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"