Equine Technologies, Inc. v. Equitechnology, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
68 F.3d 542 · 1995
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 33 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers v. Winship Green Nursing Center (1996), Sporty's Farm LLC v. Sportsman's Market, Inc. (2000)
19 federal appellate · 33 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1052 (§ 2 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (§ 32 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1115 (§ 33 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))
Relies on Reiter v. Cooper · Building & Construction Trades Council of the Metropolitan District v. Associated Builders & Contractors of Massachusetts/Rhode Island, Inc. · McCoy v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology · Planned Parenthood League v. Bellotti · Boston Athletic Association v. Sullivan
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`A term is suggestive if it requires imagination, thought and perception to reach a conclusion as to the nature of goods. A term is descriptive if it forthwith conveys an immediate idea of the ingredients, qualities or characteristics of the goods.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to a presumption that its registered trademark is inherently distinctive, as opposed to merely descriptive.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the length of time a mark has been used and the relative renown in its field; the strength of the mark in plaintiff's field of business; and the plaintiff's action in promoting the mark.” Equine Techs., 68 F.3d at 547 (internal quotation marks omitted). 15 . We agree with the concurrence that the district court erred by assessing whether the phrase”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.