Water Pik, Inc. v. Med-Systems, Inc.

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 widespread use of \Sinu-\ or \Sinus-\ prefixes in third-party marks weakened the distinctiveness of the plaintiff's SINU CLEANSE mark
• holding that survey data showing “[n]et confusion rates of 6.5% and negative 0.5% do not create a genuine factual issue of likelihood of confusion.”
• holding that \SinuSense\ and \Sinu Cleanse\ were not similar when compared as a whole
• explaining that the “central inquiry is the same” for both § 1114 and § 1125
• declining to address argument not raised in opening brief because opposing party was deprived of opportunity to respond
• declining to address argument not raised in opening brief because opposing party was deprived of opportunity to respond

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).