National Nonwovens, Inc. v. Consumer Products Enterprises, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• rebuffing plaintiffs “subtle rhetorical move that attempts to abstract [the genus] to a higher level of generality”
• reading TE-TA-MA’s “bursting-bubble presumption” to create a rebuttable presumption of protection which “evaporates as soon as evidence of invalidity is presented” but not clarifying how much evidence is necessary to “burst the bubble”
• unadorned step-by-step instruction on boiling wool felt implicated merger doctrine, because of limited number of ways in which to convey the relevant information
• written instructions on how to boil wool were not entitled to copyright protection in the absence of any stylistic flourishes or other forms of creative expression that somehow transcend the functional core of the directions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).