Elevator Safety Company

15 Cited authorities

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Brothers, Inc.
529 U.S. 205 (2000) Cited 794 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive
Traffix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc.
532 U.S. 23 (2001) Cited 599 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that the dual-spring design was not protectable because it had a purpose “beyond serving the purpose of informing consumers that the sign stands are made by” the plaintiff
Braun Inc. v. Dynamics Corp. of America
975 F.2d 815 (Fed. Cir. 1992) Cited 175 times
Holding that " claim of trade dress infringement fails if secondary meaning did not exist before the infringement began" and placing the burden of proof on the plaintiff
In re Morton-Norwich Products, Inc.
671 F.2d 1332 (C.C.P.A. 1982) Cited 109 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that configuration of "Glass Plus" spray-bottle warranted trademark protection
Valu Engineering, Inc. v. Rexnord Corp.
278 F.3d 1268 (Fed. Cir. 2002) Cited 59 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a consideration in determining whether a particular product feature is functional is the existence of "advertising materials in which the originator of the design touts the design's utilitarian advantages"
In re Steelbuilding.com
415 F.3d 1293 (Fed. Cir. 2005) Cited 26 times 2 Legal Analyses
Affirming the refusal of the Patent and Trademark Office to register the mark STEELBUILDING.COM, because the mark was descriptive of online services for the design of steel buildings, and lacked secondary meaning
Yamaha Intern. Corp. v. Hoshino Gakki Co.
840 F.2d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1988) Cited 46 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding secondary meaning for shape of guitar head always appearing in advertising and promotional literature
Petersen Mfg. Co. v. Central Purchasing
740 F.2d 1541 (Fed. Cir. 1984) Cited 48 times
Holding that summary judgment on grounds of obviousness did not require a supporting expert's opinion
In re Boston Beer Co. Ltd. Partnership
198 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 1999) Cited 14 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the claim "The Best Beer in America" amounted to mere puffery
In re Bongrain Intern
894 F.2d 1316 (Fed. Cir. 1990) Cited 10 times 1 Legal Analyses
Determining that "[g]rowth in sales" did not prove acquired distinctiveness where it "may indicate the popularity of the product itself rather than recognition of the mark"
Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification
15 U.S.C. § 1051 Cited 3,886 times 126 Legal Analyses
Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,600 times 274 Legal Analyses
Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"

Elevator Safety Company

15 Cited authorities

Holding that fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive

Holding that the dual-spring design was not protectable because it had a purpose “beyond serving the purpose of informing consumers that the sign stands are made by” the plaintiff

Holding that " claim of trade dress infringement fails if secondary meaning did not exist before the infringement began" and placing the burden of proof on the plaintiff

Holding that configuration of "Glass Plus" spray-bottle warranted trademark protection

Holding that a consideration in determining whether a particular product feature is functional is the existence of "advertising materials in which the originator of the design touts the design's utilitarian advantages"

Affirming the refusal of the Patent and Trademark Office to register the mark STEELBUILDING.COM, because the mark was descriptive of online services for the design of steel buildings, and lacked secondary meaning

Finding secondary meaning for shape of guitar head always appearing in advertising and promotional literature

Holding that summary judgment on grounds of obviousness did not require a supporting expert's opinion

Holding that the claim "The Best Beer in America" amounted to mere puffery

Determining that "[g]rowth in sales" did not prove acquired distinctiveness where it "may indicate the popularity of the product itself rather than recognition of the mark"

Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"