Garth v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that on summary judgment, “viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-movant, [we] determine whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law”
• first quoting 15 U.S.C. § 1064(1); and 21 then quoting Pinkette Clothing, Inc., v. Cosmetic Warriors Ltd., 894 F.3d 1015, 1021 (9th Cir. 22 2018)
• “Mere adoption of a mark without bona fide use in commerce, in an attempt to reserve rights for the future, is insufficient to establish rights in the mark under the Lanham Act.”
• “[U]se in commerce within the meaning of the Lanham Act requires use of a genuine character,” meaning a use “sufficiently public to identify or distinguish the marked goods in an appropriate segment of the public mind.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).