3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 20 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Dranoff-Perlstein Associates v. Harris J. Sklar.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dranoff-Perlstein Associates v. Harris J. Sklar Anchor | green | “consumers viewing the mark would probably assume that the product or service it represents is associated with the source of a different product or service identified by a similar mark.” | 11 |
| 2 | Dranoff-Perlstein Associates v. Harris J. Sklar | green | “when the consumers viewing the mark would probably assume that the product or service it represents is associated with the source of a different product or service identified by a similar mark.” | 5 |
| 3 | E.A. Sween Co. v. Deli Express of Tenafly, LLC. | green | “a 'certificate of registration issued by the united states patent and trademark office constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and ownership of a disputed mark' and is therefore sufficient to establish the first and second elements of trademark infringement and unfair c…” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.