Sunrise Jewelry Mfg. Corp. v. Fred S.A.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that trade dress can be considered generic if it “consists of the shape of a product that conforms to a well- established industry custom”
• assessing the genericness of the design at issue as to “the genus of clocks, watches, and jewelry made of precious metal”
• asking whether consumers would associate the “metallic nautical rope design” at issue with the product category “rather than with Fred’s specific line of products”
• trade dress that is shown to conform to an established industry standard is generic
• “an incontestable mark cannot be challenged, for example, for mere descriptiveness”
• “generic name” in Section 14 of the Lanham Act 15 U.S.C. Section 1064(3), “must be read expansively to encompass anything that has the potential but fails to serve as an indicator of source, such as names, words, symbols, devices, or trade dress”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).