Heatcon, Inc.

17 Cited authorities

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Brothers, Inc.
529 U.S. 205 (2000) Cited 776 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 585 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
Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.
514 U.S. 159 (1995) Cited 566 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"
In re Morton-Norwich Products, Inc.
671 F.2d 1332 (C.C.P.A. 1982) Cited 108 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 57 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"
Cartier, Inc. v. Four Star Jewelry Creations, Inc.
348 F. Supp. 2d 217 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) Cited 36 times
Holding that in making false representations to investigators about plaintiffs, defendants were not engaging in widespread dissemination or an organized campaign under the Lanham Act
In re Becton, Dickinson & Co.
675 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2012) Cited 17 times 1 Legal Analyses
No. 2011–1111. 2012-04-12 In re BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY. Richard Z. Lehv, Fross, Zelnivk, Lehrman & Zissu, of New York, NY, argued for the appellant. Christina J. Hieber, Associate Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Alexandria, VA, argued for the appellee. With her on the brief was Raymond T. Chen, Solicitor. Of counsel was Amy Nelson. CLEVENGER 4,741,446, 4,991,104, 6,602,206. Cited. Richard Z. Lehv, Fross, Zelnivk, Lehrman & Zissu, of New York, NY, argued for the appellant
In re Bose Corp.
772 F.2d 866 (Fed. Cir. 1985) Cited 30 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding pentagonal shape of loudspeaker functional where applicant's promotional materials lauded shape as functional part of sound system
Application of Deister Concentrator Company
289 F.2d 496 (C.C.P.A. 1961) Cited 66 times
Rejecting the need to consider advertising "gimmicks" designed to acquaint the public with a mark that is incapable of acquiring secondary meaning
University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co.
703 F.2d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 1983) Cited 19 times 2 Legal Analyses
In University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 703 F.2d 1372, 1376, 217 USPQ 505, 509 (Fed. Cir. 1983), the court added that section 2(a) embraces concepts of the right to privacy which may be violated even in the absence of likelihood of confusion.
Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification
15 U.S.C. § 1051 Cited 3,806 times 124 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 1,585 times 271 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"
Section 1091 - Supplemental register
15 U.S.C. § 1091 Cited 77 times
Stating that marks registered on the Supplemental Register "must be capable of distinguishing the applicant's goods or services"
Section 2.52 - Types of drawings and format for drawings
37 C.F.R. § 2.52 Cited 29 times
Providing rules for applicants “who seek to register words, letters, numbers, or any combination thereof without claim to any particular font style, size, or color”

Heatcon, Inc.

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

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"

Holding that in making false representations to investigators about plaintiffs, defendants were not engaging in widespread dissemination or an organized campaign under the Lanham Act

Holding pentagonal shape of loudspeaker functional where applicant's promotional materials lauded shape as functional part of sound system

Rejecting the need to consider advertising "gimmicks" designed to acquaint the public with a mark that is incapable of acquiring secondary meaning

In University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 703 F.2d 1372, 1376, 217 USPQ 505, 509 (Fed. Cir. 1983), the court added that section 2(a) embraces concepts of the right to privacy which may be violated even in the absence of likelihood of confusion.

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"

Stating that marks registered on the Supplemental Register "must be capable of distinguishing the applicant's goods or services"

Providing rules for applicants “who seek to register words, letters, numbers, or any combination thereof without claim to any particular font style, size, or color”