In re Application No. OP-0003 -- (TransCanada)

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “similarities are weighed more heavily than differences” (cleaned up)
• confirming “the fact that taro happened to be a root vegetable” and so connected to Taproot was not initially considered 26 in the naming decision
• “[T]he 24 question [on summary judgment in a reverse-confusion case] is whether a reasonable jury could 25 find that [the] mark is at least suggestive[.]”
• reverse confusion occurs when a 10 consumer “mistakenly thinks the senior user is the same as or is affiliated with the junior 11 user[.]”
• “Goods and services are related when they are complementary, sold to the same class of purchasers, or similar in use and function.”
• reverse confusion occurs when 8 consumer “mistakenly thinks the senior user is the same as or is affiliated with the junior 9 user[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).