# Claremont Polychemical Corp. v. Atlantic Powdered Metals, Inc.

> Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · December 29, 1972 · 470 F.2d 636

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8889151

## Case

- **Full name:** CLAREMONT POLYCHEMICAL CORP. v. ATLANTIC POWDERED METALS, INC.
- **Court:** Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
- **Decided:** December 29, 1972
- **Citations:** 470 F.2d 636
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Baldwin
- **Judges:** Baldwin, Rich
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8889151

## Opinion text

BALDWIN, Judge
(dissenting).
I disagree with the conclusion of the majority. Considering the marks in their entireties, I conclude that, as applied to the goods, the respective marks would be likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive. The marks are practically identical in meaning and they are very similar in appearance. I con *638 sider it highly likely that one who sees EVERGOLD being used in connection with bronze powder, for example, would conclude that the powder was made by the same concern who makes DURA-GOLD bronze gold pigment for decorative uses.
I would reverse.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8889151. Public record. Not legal advice.