§

McGowen Precision Barrels, LLC v. Proof Research, Inc.

92067618 (T.T.A.B. May. 20, 2021)
McGowen Precision Barrels, LLC v. Proof Research, Inc.

30 Cited authorities

  1. Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.

    572 U.S. 118 (2014)   Cited 3,044 times   74 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the respondent could not "obtain relief" under § 1125 "without evidence of injury proximately caused by [the petitioner's] alleged misrepresentations"

  2. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Brothers, Inc.

    529 U.S. 205 (2000)   Cited 796 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive

  3. Inwood Laboratories v. Ives Laboratories

    456 U.S. 844 (1982)   Cited 1,292 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that secondary liability for trademark infringement arises when a manufacturer or distributor intentionally induces another to infringe

  4. Traffix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc.

    532 U.S. 23 (2001)   Cited 601 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

  5. Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.

    514 U.S. 159 (1995)   Cited 573 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Holding companies may not "inhibit[] legitimate competition" by trademarking desirable features to "put competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage"

  6. Mcairlaids, Inc. v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.

    756 F.3d 307 (4th Cir. 2014)   Cited 247 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the availability of alternative designs was important for assessing functionality of a mark

  7. 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

  8. 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"

  9. Atl. Research Mktg. Sys. Inc. v. Troy

    659 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2011)   Cited 41 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming summary judgment to defendant on "comprising" claims that failed for lack of written description

  10. Arlington Specialties, Inc. v. Urban Aid, Inc.

    847 F.3d 415 (7th Cir. 2017)   Cited 24 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that a choice of features made for aesthetic appeal is not inherently non-functional because attractiveness is a kind of function

  11. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 29,815 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  12. Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

    Fed. R. Evid. 801   Cited 19,662 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

  13. Rule 30 - Depositions by Oral Examination

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 30   Cited 16,928 times   135 Legal Analyses
    Upholding a district court's decision not to consider the plaintiff's deposition errata sheets in opposition to a motion for summary judgment when they were untimely

  14. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,904 times   126 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

  15. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,605 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"

  16. Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1064   Cited 921 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services

  17. Section 1063 - Opposition to registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1063   Cited 148 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Identifying "dilution by blurring ... under section 1125(c) as a permissible grounds for opposition to a registration"