Legal Opinion
Tonka Corp. v. Rose Art Industries, Inc.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided October 4, 1993No. Civ. A. 93-544 (AJL)PublishedCited by 94 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LECHNER, District Judge.
This is an action brought by plaintiff Tonka Corporation (“Tonka”) alleging, inter alia, infringement by defendant Rose Art Industries, Inc. (“Rose Art”) of Tonka’s Federally-registered trademarks for the modeling compound popularly known as “PLAY-DOH” and its related accessories. Complaint (the “Complaint”), filed 5 February 1993, ¶1. Rose Art sells and has sold a modeling compound known in succession as “FUN-DOUGH” and “FUN DOUGH.” Affidavit of Robert L. Epstein (the “Epstein Aff.”), ¶ 2; Defendant’s Local Rule 12G Statement of Material Facts in Opposition to…
2Cases cited87 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Migra v. Warren City School District Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
82 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by94 opinions
- Garlanger v. VerbekeDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2002
- Eisai Co., Ltd. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2009
- Newborn Bros. v. Albion Engineering Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2014
- National Credit Union Administration v. First Union Capital Markets Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1999
- Medevac MidAtlantic, LLC v. Keystone Mercy Health PlanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
89 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.