Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 4 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 Nutri/system, Inc. v. Con-Stan Industries, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nutri/system, Inc. v. Con-Stan Industries, Inc. Anchor | green | “continuum of marks from 'generic,' afforded no protection; through 'descriptive' or 'suggestive,' given moderate protection; to 'arbitrary' or 'fanciful' awarded maximum protection.” | 4 |
| 2 | Martha Robi v. Five Platters, Inc., Jean Bennett, and Buck Ram | green | “deliberately, vigorously, and successfully confused purchasers.” | 4 |
| 3 | Estate of Sanders | green | “from presenting all of his case to the court,” | 4 |
| 4 | Estate of Sanders | green | “the aggrieved party is kept in ignorance of the proceeding or is in some other way induced not to appear.” | 4 |
| 5 | Carr v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n | green | “all the parties interested in the estate, including minors who were not represented at the probate hearing by a guardian.” | 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.