CeramTec GmbH v. Coorstek Bioceramics LLC
Link to PDF of Ceramtec decision
Google NotebookLM summary:
This document is a court opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the case of CeramTec GMBH v. COORSTEK BIOCERAMICS LLC, decided on January 3, 2024. The appeal originated from a decision of the United States Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the Board) which canceled CeramTec’s trademarks protecting the pink color of their ceramic hip components2. The court ultimately affirmed the Board’s decision.
The case revolves around the functionality of the pink color in CeramTec’s hip components. CeramTec argued that the pink color was a distinctive trademark, while Coorstek, a competitor, contended that the pink color resulted from the addition of chromia, which was functional to the component.
The Board found in favor of Coorstek, concluding that the pink color was functional based on several factors, including:
●
CeramTec’s own patents and public communications, which disclosed the functional benefits of adding chromia to the ceramic material5.
●
The lack of evidence regarding whether different colored hip components would have equivalent mechanical properties to Biolox Delta.
●
Conflicting evidence regarding whether the addition of chromia decreased the cost of manufacturing the hip components.
The court agreed with the Board, finding substantial evidence to support its decision7. The court also addressed CeramTec’s argument that Coorstek should be barred from claiming the pink color was functional due to their previous statements that chromia provided no material benefit, an argument rooted in the doctrine of unclean hands8. The court stated that while the Board erred in suggesting that the unclean hands defense was categorically unavailable in functionality proceedings, the error was harmless in this case.
