Katz v. Modiri

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the “Juva” mark suggestive because it bore a linguistic “relationship to the rejuvenating qualities associated with a spa” and “[c]onnecting the name to the spa services requires imagination”
• “[T]he [c]ourt finds the mark to be suggestive, and while it is not accorded the maximum degree of protection . . . the mark is nonetheless inherently distinctive and strong.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).