Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation's Foodservice, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “GIANT” is the dominant portion in “GIANT HAMBURGERS” and “GIANT FOOD, SUPER GIANT”
• noting that “geographical distance between the present locations of the respective businesses of the two parties has little relevance in” a cancellation petition alleging a likelihood of confusion
• noting that “geographical distance between the present locations of the respective businesses of the two parties has little relevance in” a cancellation petition alleging a likelihood of confusion
• noting that “geographical distance between the present locations of the respective businesses of the two parties has little relevance in” a cancellation petition alleging a likelihood of confusion
• giving greater force and effect to the word GIANT as the dominant portion of the mark GIANT HAMBURGERS
• “15 U.S.C. § 1057(b) creates a presumption that the registrant has the exclusive right to use its mark throughout the United' States”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).