JM UC Group, LLC v. Precious Care Mgt., LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• 36 years of use with substantial advertising and sales supported the finding of acquired distinctiveness
• “[T]here is no doubt that Congress intended that the burden of proof [under Section 2(f)] should rest upon the applicant”
• “’There is no doubt that Congress intended that the burden of proof [under Section 2(f)] should rest upon the applicant ….’”
• “There is no doubt that Congress intended that the burden of proof [under Section 2(f)] should rest upon the applicant ....”
• “[T]here is no doubt that Congress intended 20 Ser. Nos. 75460305, 75460306, 75496386, and 75497543 that the burden of proof [under Section 2(f)] should rest upon the applicant”
• “[T]here is no doubt that Congress intended 20 Ser. Nos. 75460305, 75460306, 75496386, and 75497543 that the burden of proof [under Section 2(f)] should rest upon the applicant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).