§

Newborn Brothers and Co., Inc. v. Dripless, Inc.

No. 91113471 (T.T.A.B. Aug. 16, 2002)
Newborn Brothers and Co., Inc. v. Dripless, Inc.

12 Cited authorities

  1. Inwood Laboratories v. Ives Laboratories

    456 U.S. 844 (1982)   Cited 1,295 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that secondary liability for trademark infringement arises when a manufacturer or distributor intentionally induces another to infringe

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

    532 U.S. 23 (2001)   Cited 604 times   29 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

  3. Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.

    514 U.S. 159 (1995)   Cited 576 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"

  4. Armco, Inc. v. Armco Burglar Alarm Co., Inc.

    693 F.2d 1155 (5th Cir. 1982)   Cited 141 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "Armco" mark was arbitrary as applied to a steel company

  5. In re Morton-Norwich Products, Inc.

    671 F.2d 1332 (C.C.P.A. 1982)   Cited 110 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that configuration of "Glass Plus" spray-bottle warranted trademark protection

  6. Valu Engineering, Inc. v. Rexnord Corp.

    278 F.3d 1268 (Fed. Cir. 2002)   Cited 60 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"

  7. 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."

  8. 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

  9. Brunswick Corp. v. British Seagull LTD

    35 F.3d 1527 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 28 times
    Holding color black for outboard motors was functional because, while it had no utilitarian effect on the mechanical working of the engines, it nevertheless provided other identifiable competitive advantages, for example ease of coordination with a variety of boat colors and reduction in the apparent size of the engines

  10. Selva & Sons, Inc. v. Nina Footwear, Inc.

    705 F.2d 1316 (Fed. Cir. 1983)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that challenger established standing under § 1064 notwithstanding the parties’ written agreement not to challenge each other's registration or each other's rights to use and sell goods under the mark

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

    Fed. R. Evid. 801   Cited 19,763 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

  12. Rule 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 803   Cited 13,108 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing exception to rule against hearsay for records of regularly conducted activities