General Technologies, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Brothers, Inc.
529 U.S. 205 (2000) Cited 806 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive
Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.
514 U.S. 159 (1995) Cited 582 times 52 Legal Analyses
Holding companies may not "inhibit[] legitimate competition" by trademarking desirable features to "put competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage"
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 Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.
774 F.2d 1116 (Fed. Cir. 1985) Cited 61 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the color "pink" as a trademark for manufacturer's fibrous glass residential insulation was valid when the pink color gave "the public a reliable indication of source and thus facilitate[d] responsible marketplace competition."
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
In re Boston Beer Co. Ltd. Partnership
198 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 1999) Cited 15 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the claim "The Best Beer in America" amounted to mere puffery
In re Thrifty, Inc.
274 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2001) Cited 10 times
Applying the material alteration standard in affirming the Board's rejection of an amendment to a rejected trademark application
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 3,924 times 127 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 1,617 times 276 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"

General Technologies, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

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

Holding companies may not "inhibit[] legitimate competition" by trademarking desirable features to "put competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage"

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 the color "pink" as a trademark for manufacturer's fibrous glass residential insulation was valid when the pink color gave "the public a reliable indication of source and thus facilitate[d] responsible marketplace competition."

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

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

Applying the material alteration standard in affirming the Board's rejection of an amendment to a rejected trademark application

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"