Clamp Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Enco Manufacturing Company, Inc., Colex, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an expired utility patent provided strong evidence of functionality, but that the plaintiff had presented sufficient evidence to overcome it
• stating that the court should consider “the extent of advertising touting the utilitarian advantages of the design ” (emphasis added)
• noting that “considerable support exists for a determination of functionality” where “[a|n expired utility patent exists” but that plaintiff could nonetheless establish claimed trade dress was nonfunctional
• placing the burden of proving nonfunctionality on the trademark holder whose trademark had incontestable status
• applying the rule for acquired distinctiveness to the design of a product
• district court did not abuse its discretion because its factual findings were not clearly erroneous

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).