§

White Rock Distilleries, Inc.

No. 77093221 (T.T.A.B. Oct. 5, 2009)
White Rock Distilleries, Inc.

8 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. Palm Bay Imp. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin

    396 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 72 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Finding similarity between "VEUVE ROYALE" and "VEUVE CLICQUOT" because "VEUVE ... remains a ‘prominent feature’ as the first word in the mark and the first word to appear on the label"

  3. 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

  4. G.H. Mumm & Cie v. Desnoes & Geddes, Ltd.

    917 F.2d 1292 (Fed. Cir. 1990)   Cited 9 times
    Stating that a determination of secondary meaning is a question of fact which is reviewed on appeal under the clearly erroneous standard

  5. 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

  6. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. C.J. Webb, Inc.

    442 F.2d 1376 (C.C.P.A. 1971)   Cited 9 times

    Patent Appeal No. 8525. June 3, 1971. Paul L. Gomory, Washington, D.C., Jack E. Phillips, J. Arthur Young and Donald J. Quigg, Bartlesville, Okla., attorneys of record, for appellant. Edward C. Gonda, Arthur H. Seidel, Seidel, Gonda Goldhammer, Philadelphia, Pa., attorneys of record, for appellee. Before RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN and LANE, Judges, and LANDIS, Judge, United States Customs Court, sitting by designation. LANE, Judge. This appeal is from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

  7. Application of Data Packaging Corp.

    453 F.2d 1300 (C.C.P.A. 1972)   Cited 8 times

    Patent Appeal No. 8592. January 27, 1972. Stanley Sacks, Boston, Mass. (Wolf, Greenfield Sacks), Boston, Mass., attorneys of record, for appellant. S. Wm. Cochran, Washington, D.C., for Commissioner of Patents; Raymond E. Martin, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN, and LANE, Judges. RICH, Judge. This ex parte appeal is from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, one member dissenting

  8. Natl. Dist. Ch. v. William Grant Sons

    505 F.2d 719 (C.C.P.A. 1974)   Cited 3 times

    Patent Appeal No. 74-566. November 27, 1974. David S. Patterson, Breed, Abbott Morgan, New York City, atty. of record, for appellant. Gerald J. Craugh, New York City, of counsel. Edward G. Fenwick, Jr., Mason, Fenwick Lawrence, Washington, D.C., atty. of record, for appellee. Appeal from the Patent Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, LANE and MILLER, Judges. RICH, Judge. This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Trademark Trial and Appeal