E.T. Browne Drug Co. v. Cococare Products, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that use of the phrase “Palmer’s Cocoa Butter Formula” was not probative on the question of whether the phrase “Cocoa Butter Formula” had acquired secondary meaning
• noting that designation of a term as descriptive or generic is a question of fact
• stating that whether “mark is merely descriptive or has acquired secondary meaning depends on non-exhaustive list of factors”
• explaining that the party seeking enforcement of trademark laws has the burden of proving the existence of a protectable trademark when the mark does not appear on the PTO's Principal Register
• explaining that the party seeking enforcement of trademark laws has the burden of proving the existence of a protectable trademark when the mark does not appear on the PTO’s Principal Register
• stating that the plaintiff “could have used survey evidence to show that ‘Cocoa Butter Formula’ had acquired a secondary meaning in the minds of consumers, thus creating a genuine issue of material fact on the issue”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).