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