# Celanese Corp. v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.

> Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · March 4, 1946 · 154 F.2d 143

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9637233

## Case

- **Full name:** Celanese Corporation of America v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.
- **Court:** Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
- **Decided:** March 4, 1946
- **Citations:** 154 F.2d 143; 33 C.C.P.A. 857; 69 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 69
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Garrett
- **Judges:** Garrett, Presiding Judge, and Bland, Hatfield, Jackson, and O'connell, Associate Judges
- **Cited by:** 22 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/9637233

## Opinion text

GARRETT, Presiding Judge
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent from the conclusion reached by my associates in this case.
It seems to me that the presence of the word “Du Pont” as an integral and presumably valid part of appellee’s mark so clearly states the origin of appellee’s goods that there is not the slightest likelihood of the public being confused or purchasers deceived as to the origin of appellant’s merchandise by the application thereto of the notation “Clarifoil” as a trade-mark, notwithstanding its partial resemblance to the word “Clar-apel.”

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9637233. Public record. Not legal advice.