Xtreme Lashes, LLC v. Xtended Beauty, 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 a chirping sound could not acquire secondary meaning unless it was used as a trademark
• explaining that \a suggestive term ... requires the consumer to exercise his imagination to apply the trademark to the good\
• explaining that \[i]t is proper to give more weight to the distinctive portions of a mark and less weight to unremarkable or generic portions\
• suggesting that factor one supports trademark protection if the mark had acquired secondary meaning
• finding that “the consumer must exercise some imagination to associate ‘xtreme lashes’ with ‘artificially elongated eyelashes’ ”
• noting that widespread use of a term in commerce weighs against the strength of a mark employing that term, particularly if the term is common in the plaintiffs specific market

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).