Legal Opinion
In Re Teledyne Industries, Inc. D/b/a, Teledyne Water Pik
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided December 29, 1982No. 82-555PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JACK R. MILLER, Circuit Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“board”), 212 USPQ 299 (1981), affirming the examiner’s refusal to register appellant’s asserted trademark for showerheads on the principal register. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
The asserted trademark consists of “the configuration of the goods” shown below. 1
Appellant owns three U.S. patents directed to “Spray Nozzles.” U.S. Patent No. 3,762,648 (“ ’648 patent”), issued October 2, 1973, claims and describes a “spray nozzle especially useful as a showerhead…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- South Corporation and Seal Fleet, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1982
- In re Morton-Norwich Products, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1982
- Application of Mogen David Wine CorporationCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Kohler Co. v. Moen Incorporated, F/k/a Stanadyne, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
- In Re Pacer TechnologyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Valu Engineering, Inc. v. Rexnord CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- In Re Bose CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.