§
Ex parte Bruns

12 Cited authorities

  1. Avia Group International, Inc. v. L.A. Gear California, Inc.

    853 F.2d 1557 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 365 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that parties moving for summary judgment bear burden of demonstrating that there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute

  2. L.A. GEAR, INC. v. THOM McAN SHOE CO

    988 F.2d 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1993)   Cited 217 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendant's trade dress was not likely to be confused with that of plaintiff because of conspicuous placement on accused dress of defendant's identifying marks

  3. Seiko Epson Corp. v. Nu-Kote Int., Inc.

    190 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 68 times
    Holding that automatic stay does not apply to nondebtor entities even if in similar legal or factual situation as debtor

  4. In re Oetiker

    977 F.2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 66 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Reversing for "improperly combined" references, because "[i]f examination at the initial stage does not produce a prima facie case of unpatentability, then without more the applicant is entitled to grant of the patent"

  5. In re Piasecki

    745 F.2d 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1984)   Cited 73 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding nonobviousness where the evidence demonstrated a failure of others to provide a feasible solution to a longstanding problem

  6. Power Controls Corp. v. Hybrinetics, Inc.

    806 F.2d 234 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 42 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Power Controls, the district court issued a preliminary injunction against the defendant, supported only by a one-sentence explanation from the bench that was not followed by any further findings of fact or conclusions of law. 806 F.2d at 236.

  7. Best Lock Corp. v. Ilco Unican Corp.

    94 F.3d 1563 (Fed. Cir. 1996)   Cited 25 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding design of key not patentable because dictated by function, i.e., the design of the corresponding lock

  8. Application of Kronig

    539 F.2d 1300 (C.C.P.A. 1976)   Cited 18 times
    Holding no new ground of rejection when the Board relied on the same statutory basis and the same reasoning advanced by the examiner

  9. Application of Carletti

    328 F.2d 1020 (C.C.P.A. 1964)   Cited 17 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Determining whether the appearance is "directed by" the use of the article

  10. APPLICATION OF BOON

    439 F.2d 724 (C.C.P.A. 1971)   Cited 3 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Patent Appeal No. 8398. April 1, 1971. Rehearing Denied May 20, 1971. James M. Heilman, Heilman Heilman, Washington, D.C., attorney of record, for appellant. S. Wm. Cochran, Washington, D.C., for the Commissioner of Patents. Jere W. Sears, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Before RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN and LANE, Judges, and NEWMAN, Judge, United States Customs Court, sitting by designation. BALDWIN, Judge. Boon appeals from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals which affirmed the rejection

  11. Section 171 - Patents for designs

    35 U.S.C. § 171   Cited 337 times   70 Legal Analyses
    Protecting "any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture ...."

  12. Section 1.132 - Affidavits or declarations traversing rejections or objections

    37 C.F.R. § 1.132   Cited 104 times   14 Legal Analyses

    When any claim of an application or a patent under reexamination is rejected or objected to, any evidence submitted to traverse the rejection or objection on a basis not otherwise provided for must be by way of an oath or declaration under this section. 37 C.F.R. §1.132 65 FR 57057 , Sept. 20, 2000 Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations. Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations. Part 7 is placed in the