Search for: "Simple Designs Manufacturing, Inc." Results 61 - 80 of 431
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 May 2012, 5:00 am by Bexis
May 2, 2012), was more or less a crie de coeur over what we saw as an essentially absurd result:  that while a simple warning claim involving a generic drug is indisputably preempted under PLIVA, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 3:10 am
Wellington).Functionality: The Board considers the following factors to determine whether a mark is functional:(1) the existence of a utility patent disclosing the utilitarian advantages of the design;(2) advertising materials in which the originator of the design touts the design’s utilitarian advantages;(3) the availability to competitors of functionally equivalent designs; and(4) facts indicating that the design results in a comparatively… [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 1:07 pm by RatnerPrestia
To address the gamut of potential knockoffs, manufacturers often obtain a portfolio of design patents that separately claim the product’s overall design and its individual elements. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 9:46 am
  Design & Display manufactured and sold retail equipment including display panels for use in shops. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 8:41 am by Brian A. Comer
  My coffee cup is pretty simple, but I could not tell you why the manufacturer chose its composition, dimensions, etc. [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 10:22 am
Defendant Zimmer Holdings designs, develops, manufactures, and markets reconstructive orthopedic implants, including dental implants. [read post]
25 May 2015, 10:01 pm by Barry Barnett
The court's test for nonfunctionality weighed four factors: “'(1) whether the design yields a utilitarian advantage, (2) whether alternative designs are available, (3) whether advertising touts the utilitarian advantages of the design, and (4) whether the particular design results from a comparatively simple or inexpensive method of manufacture.'” Apple, slip op. at 9-10 (quoting Disc Golf, 158 F.3d at 1006). … [read post]
29 May 2015, 1:11 pm by Martin Miller
Though the manufacturer is selling hardware or software specifically designed (e.g., programmed) to perform the patented method, only the end-users (i.e., customers) are direct infringers when they use the manufacturer’s product to perform the patented method. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 3:04 am
In re National Presto Industries, Inc., Serial No. 85870582 (April 15, 2016) [not precedential].The Board once again applied the Morton-Norwich factors in determining functionality:(1) the existence of a utility patent that discloses the utilitarian advantages of the design sought to be registered; (2) advertising by the applicant that touts the utilitarian advantages of the design; (3) facts pertaining to the availability of alternative designs; and (4) facts… [read post]
29 Aug 2006, 5:17 am
" Applying the CAFC's Morton-Norwich analysis, the Board considered (1) whether a utility patent discloses the utilitarian advantages of the design; (2) whether advertising materials tout the design's utilitarian advantages; (3) the availability of functionally-equivalent alternatives; and (4) whether the design results in a comparatively simple or cheap method of manufacture. [read post]