Type Proceeding
Date of or Party/
Issued Case (1) App'n No. Parties
11-6 CU 1,012 Dynamark Security
Centers, Inc. v.
Intruder Alert
Systems of San
Antonio, Inc.
11-6 OPP 95,834 Intelligent Sports
Inc. v. Randy
Buller
Opposer's/ Applicant's/
Petitioner's Respondent's
TTAB Mark and Mark and
Issue Decision Goods/Services Goods/Services
whether the Concurrent "S.A.F.E. SECURITY "SAFE/SECURITY
concurrent use regis- AFFORDABLE FOR ALARMS FOR EVERY-
use applicant tration EVERYONE" ONE"
established granted [leasing of secur- [burglar alarms]
its entitle- ity systems for (limited to San
ment to a residential and Antonio, Texas and
concurrent commercial use] four surrounding
use registra- (for all of the counties)
tion for its U.S. except for
claimed ter- San Antonio, Texas
ritory and four surround-
ing counties)
2(d) Opposition "THE SPORTS "PARTS
Dismissed AUTHORITY," AUTHORITY"
"THE LOW PRICE [retail store ser-
AUTHORITY" et al. vices and distri-
[retail store ser- butorship services
vices featuring a dealing in automo-
wide range of bile parts, sup-
sports equipment- plies and acces-
from footwear and sories]
apparel to hard
goods];
"AUTHORITY"
[rainwear,
jackets, coats,
suits, slacks, and
vests];
"THE SKI
AUTHORITY"
[retail store ser-
vices featuring
ski equipment
and clothing];
"THE BAG
AUTHORITY"
[athletic bags,
etc.]
(opposer claiming
a family of
"AUTHORITY" marks)
Mark and Citable as
Goods Cited by Precedent
Examining Atty. of TTAB
No
No
(1)EX=EX PARTE APPEAL; OPP=OPPOSITION; CANC=CANCELLATION; CU=CONCURRENT
USE; (SJ)=SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (R)=REQ. FOR RECONSIDERATION