Recot, Inc. v. M.C. Becton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Board erred in declining to con- sider lay evidence that companies sell the goods of both parties
• stating that “Frito Lay” word mark “casts a ‘long shadow which competitors must avoid’ ”
• finding that some snack chip makers might also make dog food
• finding likelihood of confusion between “Frito Lay” and “Fido Lay” even though one is used for snack chips and one is used for dog food
• finding the Board erred in declining to consider lay evidence that several companies sell both pet and human food products
• finding the Board erred in declining to consider lay evidence that several companies sell both pet and human food products

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).