Legal Opinion · Dissent
The B.V.D. Licensing Corporation v. Body Action Design, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided April 28, 1988No. 87-1646Published
1DissentNies, Circuit Judge
I dissent. If the trademark sought to be registered were the word “BAD”, I would agree with the majority’s affirmance. However, the mark is not the word “BAD” nor is it displayed as a word. The mark is comprised of the initials of applicant’s corporate name and is displayed B.A.D, that is, the letters are separated by periods or dots.
The record in this case amounts to little more than the application file and the numerous registrations of opposer for the mark B.V.D. Nevertheless, the record is sufficient to prove opposer has long-established, prior rights in B.V.D. for essentially the same…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Specialty Brands, Inc. v. Coffee Bean Distributors, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co. v. Houston Ice & Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Plough, Inc. v. Kreis Laboratories, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
- Planters Nut & Chocolate Company v. Crown Nut Company, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- Baker v. Master Printers Union of New JerseyDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1940
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.