Opinion · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Blek Co. v. Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Mfg. Co.

18 F.2d 191

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1927-03-07
Topic
general

ROBB, Associate Justice. Appeal from concurrent decisions of the tribunals of the Patent Office, in a trade-mark interference proceeding, refusing registration to the appellant. Long prior to the adoption by appellant of the mark consisting of the words “Red Dot,” with a circular spot between, for use on men’s, boy’s, children’s, and women’s garters, appellee had widely used a similar mark on rubber boots, overshoes, woolen boots, and socks. The Patent Office found, and we concur in the finding, that the use of deceptively similar marks on socks and garters would be likely to cause confusion in trade and mislead purchasers. Wolf & Sons v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Blek Co. v. Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Mfg. Co.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
5 opinions
BLEK CO. v. MISHAWAKA RUBBER WOOLEN MFG. CO.,18 F.2d 191(D.C. Cir. 1927)
BLEK CO., Manufacturers, v. MISHAWAKA RUBBER WOOLEN MFG. CO.
No. 1911.
Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia.
Submitted January 14, 1927.
Decided March 7, 1927.
Appeal from Decision of Commissioner of Patents.

Proceeding for registration of trade-mark by the Blek Company, Manufacturers, opposed by the Mishawaka Rubber Woolen Manufacturing Company. From a decision sustaining the opposition, applicant appeals. Affirmed.
Ralph Kalish, of St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.

E.W. Shepard, of Washington, D.C., and E.M. Giles, of Chicago, Ill., for appellee.
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB and VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justices.
ROBB, Associate Justice.
Appeal from concurrent decisions of the tribunals of the Patent Office, in a trade-mark interference proceeding, refusing registration to the appellant.

Long prior to the adoption by appellant of the mark consisting of the words "Red Dot," with a circular spot between, for use on men's, boy's, children's, and women's garters, appellee had widely used a similar mark on rubber boots, overshoes, woolen boots, and socks. The Patent Office found, and we concur in the finding, that the use of deceptively similar marks on socks and garters would be likely to cause confusion in trade and mislead purchasers. Wolf Sons v. Lord Taylor,41 App. D.C. 514.

The decision is affirmed.

Affirmed.Page 192