The Kong Company, LLC

12 Cited authorities

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

    529 U.S. 205 (2000)   Cited 799 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive
  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. 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
  5. 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"
  6. Eco Manufacturing LLC v. Honeywell International Inc.

    357 F.3d 649 (7th Cir. 2003)   Cited 38 times
    Finding the round design of Honeywell International, Inc.'s thermostat was functional on estoppel grounds based on "sworn claims of the round shape's utility that Honeywell made to secure issuance of" a claim in its prior patent on the product
  7. Petersen Mfg. Co. v. Central Purchasing

    740 F.2d 1541 (Fed. Cir. 1984)   Cited 48 times
    Holding that summary judgment on grounds of obviousness did not require a supporting expert's opinion
  8. Textron, Inc. v. U.S. Intern. Trade Com'n

    753 F.2d 1019 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 42 times
    Holding that the "overall design" of the product was functional, but proceeding to examine whether the two arguably non-functional features had acquired secondary meaning
  9. In re R.M. Smith, Inc.

    734 F.2d 1482 (Fed. Cir. 1984)   Cited 15 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that existence of design patent "may be some evidence of non-functionality"
  10. Application of Minnesota Mining Mfg. Co.

    335 F.2d 836 (C.C.P.A. 1964)   Cited 14 times

    Patent Appeal No. 7174. August 27, 1964. Mark W. Gehan, Charles H. Lauder, St. Paul, Minn. (Carpenter, Abbott, Coulter Kinney, St. Paul, Minn., of counsel), for appellant. Clarence W. Moore, Washington, D.C., for the Commissioner of Patents. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, MARTIN, SMITH, and ALMOND, Judges. RICH, Judge. This appeal is from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (136 U.S.P.Q. 676, abstract) refusing to register, on the Supplemental Register, appellant's mark on

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,610 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"
  12. 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”