Case law

Application of Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company

335 F.2d 836 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 27, 1964

The board said the same thing in substance. … The Patent Office, in saying ‘configuration of goods” means only configuration of a part or feature, relies on the opinion of the District Court for the District of Columbia in Alan Wood Steel Co. v.

United States v. Geisenheimer

6 Ct. Cust. 520 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 28, 1916

The board having found that the containers were of that character apparently concluded that they were of the same class as those considered by this court in United States v. Garramone ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 30 ; T. … The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

In re Savage

110 F.2d 680 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 1, 1940

The Board of Appeals affirmed that ground, but if appellant took no appeal to the board upon that ground appellant’s appeal from the decision of the examiner should have been dismissed by the board. … In the case of Noxon v. Potts, 26 C. C. P. A.

In re Shareholders Data Corp.

495 F.2d 1360 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 16, 1974

See Hearings on H.R. 9041 before House Subcomm. on Trade-Marks of House Comm. on Patents, 75th Cong., 3d Sess., p. 126 (1938); Elgin National Watch Co. v. … Illinois Watch Case Co., 179 U.S. 665, 673 , 21 S.Ct. 270 , 45 L.Ed. 365 (1901), and American Steel Foundries v. Robertson, Commissioner, 269 U.S. 372, 380 , 46 S.Ct. 160 , 70 L.Ed. 317 (1926).

In re Shetterly

48 F.2d 421 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 15, 1931

The record does not disclose how the design is made and agreeable to Gorham Co. v. White, 14 Wall. 525 , we regard this as of no consequence in determining the issue of the case. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

The Polymer Corporation v. Dayco Corporation, by Change of Name From the Dayton Rubber Company

324 F.2d 1019 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 12, 1963

United States Time Corp. v. Tennenbaum, 267 F.2d 327 , 46 CCPA 895. The decision is reversed. Reversed. 1 . Application Serial No. 75,548, filed June 11, 1959. 2 . … The opposition was dismissed by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, 134 USPQ 582 . 3 . Registration No. 617,475, issued December 13, 1955. 4 .

Dreyfus v. Lilienfeld

49 F.2d 1065 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 5, 1931

(Patents) 1526, — F. (2d) -, and Dreyfus v. Lilinfeld, 18 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1539, — F. (2d) -, decided concurrently herewith. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

Harrison D. Brailsford v. Marius Jean Lavet and Jacques Jean Gustave Dietsch

318 F.2d 942 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 20, 1963

In Blaekmore v. … Similarly, in McCabe v.

Farrell v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 278 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 9, 1924

(Inc.) v. United States ( 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 275 ; T. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

In re Castner

518 F.2d 1234 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 26, 1975

Patent Office Board of Appeals erred in affirming the Examiner. 2. The U.S. … See Pen *1238 etrene Corp. v.

Schenley Industries, Inc. v. Fournier, Inc.

357 F.2d 395 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 24, 1966

The board cited its decision, in Castle & Cooke, Inc. v. Royal Hawaiian Liqueurs, Inc., 140 USPQ 40 (T.T. & A.B., 1963) in connection with its view on this point. … Since that decision was reversed on appeal in Castle & Cooke, Inc. v. Joseph F. Seagram & Sons, Inc., supra, it cannot provide any support for the board’s position.

Cooperative Quality Marketing, Inc. v. Dean Milk Company

314 F.2d 552 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 18, 1963

The board was of the opinion that “COUNTRY CHARM,” per se, was used by the opposer as a trademark. … Shoe Corporation of America v.

Procter & Gamble Co. v. Master Kleens of America, Inc.

487 F.2d 550 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 21, 1973

Appellant argues for a broad scope of protection for its mark under the decision and opinion of this court in Procter and Gamble Company v. Conway, D. B. A. … The decision of the board is affirmed. Affirmed. . The board’s opinion is reported in full at 171 USPQ 382 (1971). . Serial Nos. 297,452 and 297,454, both filed May 6, 1968. .

McBride v. Teeple

129 F.2d 328 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 1, 1942

We there affirmed the decision of the Board of Appeals awarding priority of the invention defined in counts 2 to 7, inclusive, to appellee. … (Patents) 587, 35 F. (2d) 59; Fessenden v. Wilson et al., 18 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1171, 48 F. (2d) 422; Writer v. Kiwad, 20 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 869, 63 F. (2d) 259; Euth v. Oliver, 21 C. C. P. A.

Chin & Co. v. United States

11 Ct. Cust. 124 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 16, 1921

The Board of General Appraisers followed an earlier ruling thereof, Abstract 43034, wherein they based their conclusion upon the decision of this court in United States v. Gavin & Co. ( 7 Ct. Cust. Appls., 292 ; T. … Accordingly the decision of the board is reversed.

Austin v. United States

1 Ct. Cust. 510 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 17, 1911

It was first presented to the Board of General Appraisers in Austin, Baldwin & Co. v. United States (144 Fed. Rep., 702), opinion by General Appraiser McClelland.' … The decision of the Board of General Appraisers, following the case of Murphy v. United States, supra, is affirmed. Smith, Barbee, De Yries, and MartiN, Judges, concur.

Lasker v. kurowski

90 F.2d 132 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 7, 1937

In the case of American Bell Telephone Company v. The People’s Telephone Company et al., 29 O. G. 1029 ; 1884 C. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

In re Bonnell

129 F.2d 520 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 15, 1942

It is well settled, of course, that in the consideration of patent-ability respecting a design the matter of its appearance, when viewed as a whole, is largely controlling [Gorman Company v. White, 81 U. … The decision of the board is, therefore, affirmed. LeNRoct, /., dissents.

In re Fisher

37 F.2d 628 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 21, 1930

Schuricht v. McNutt v. Willis, 26 Fed. Rep. (2d) 388; Permutit Co. v. Harvey Laundry Co. et al., 214 Fed. Rep. 937. In Carson v. American Smelting & Refining Co., 4 Fed. … Badische Anilin, etc., Fabrik v. Kalle, 94 Fed. Rep. 163, affirmed 104 Fed. Rep. 802. For the reasons stated, the decision of the Board of Appeals is reversed.

Myers v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 350 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 4, 1924

In the case of Simon, Buhler & Baumann v. United States ( 8 Ct. Cust. Appls. 273 ; T. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.