Thomas & Betts Corp. v. Panduit Corp.

Decision Date30 April 1998
Docket NumberNos. 96-3914,97-2108,s. 96-3914
Citation46 U.S.P.Q.2d 1026,138 F.3d 277
PartiesTHOMAS & BETTS CORPORATION and Thomas & Betts Holdings, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PANDUIT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
127 cases
  • MINEMYER v. B-ROC REPRESENTATIVES, INC.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • October 27, 2009
    ...amount and manner of advertising, volume of sales, place in the market and proof of intentional copying. See Thomas & Betts Corp. v. Panduit Corp., 138 F.3d 277, 291 (7th Cir.1998). The plaintiff concedes that he has no consumer testimony or survey evidence to demonstrate secondary meaning.......
  • Frobose v. American Sav. and Loan Ass'n of Danville
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • July 31, 1998
    ...v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249, 255, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 2510-11, 2513, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); Thomas & Betts Corp. v. Panduit Corp., 138 F.3d 277, 297 (7th Cir.1998); Doe v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co., 42 F.3d 439, 443 (7th Cir.1994). The sole question before the court here was wheth......
  • Pebble Beach Co. v. Tour 18 I Ltd.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • September 14, 1998
    ...S.Ct. 971. Thus, federal trademark protection is not limited by the preemption holdings in Sears-Compco. See Thomas & Betts Corp. v. Panduit Corp., 138 F.3d 277, 286 (7th Cir.1998) (noting that the Sears-Compco and Bonito Boats holdings have no effect on the scope of federal trademark or un......
  • Nordock Inc. v. Sys. Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin
    • February 26, 2013
    ...dress and unfair competition claim, Nordock bears the burden of establishing the elements of that claim. See Thomas & Betts Corp. v. Panduit Corp., 138 F.3d 277, 291 (7th Cir.1998). Nordock's technical expert, Steven Carl Visser (“Visser”) opined about the functional versus ornamental dicho......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT