Seculus Da Amazonia S/A v. Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha

11 Cited authorities

Person's Co., Ltd. v. Christman
900 F.2d 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1990) Cited 51 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that foreign use is not sufficient to establish priority rights even over a United States competitor who took mark in bad faith
Lipton Industries, Inc. v. Ralston Purina
670 F.2d 1024 (C.C.P.A. 1982) Cited 58 times
Holding that admission contained in an answer was binding, despite the fact that it was made "on information and belief"
Jewelers Vigilance Comm. v. Ullenberg Corp.
823 F.2d 490 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 24 times
Finding a “real interest” in a mark's registration can be shown “without proprietary rights in the mark or without asserting that it has a right or has an interest in using the alleged mark”
Selva & Sons, Inc. v. Nina Footwear, Inc.
705 F.2d 1316 (Fed. Cir. 1983) Cited 27 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that challenger established standing under § 1064 notwithstanding the parties’ written agreement not to challenge each other's registration or each other's rights to use and sell goods under the mark
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 359,168 times 954 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 162,760 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter
15 U.S.C. § 1127 Cited 3,011 times 98 Legal Analyses
Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark
Section 1526 - Merchandise bearing American trade-mark
19 U.S.C. § 1526 Cited 168 times 4 Legal Analyses
Barring the importation of goods bearing a registered U.S. trademark without the trademark owner’s written consent "at the time of making entry"
Section 1063 - Opposition to registration
15 U.S.C. § 1063 Cited 147 times 19 Legal Analyses
Identifying "dilution by blurring ... under section 1125(c) as a permissible grounds for opposition to a registration"
Section 19 - Interlocking directorates and officers
15 U.S.C. § 19 Cited 110 times 69 Legal Analyses
Interlocking directorates
Section 1068 - Action of Director in interference, opposition, and proceedings for concurrent use registration or for cancellation
15 U.S.C. § 1068 Cited 25 times 3 Legal Analyses
Stating that, in such proceedings, the Patent and Trademark Office may "modify the application or registration by limiting the goods or services specified therein"

Seculus Da Amazonia S/A v. Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha

11 Cited authorities

Holding that foreign use is not sufficient to establish priority rights even over a United States competitor who took mark in bad faith

Holding that admission contained in an answer was binding, despite the fact that it was made "on information and belief"

Finding a “real interest” in a mark's registration can be shown “without proprietary rights in the mark or without asserting that it has a right or has an interest in using the alleged mark”

Holding that challenger established standing under § 1064 notwithstanding the parties’ written agreement not to challenge each other's registration or each other's rights to use and sell goods under the mark

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

Barring the importation of goods bearing a registered U.S. trademark without the trademark owner’s written consent "at the time of making entry"

Identifying "dilution by blurring ... under section 1125(c) as a permissible grounds for opposition to a registration"

Interlocking directorates

Stating that, in such proceedings, the Patent and Trademark Office may "modify the application or registration by limiting the goods or services specified therein"