Legal Opinion

Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. Leo C. Hofman

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided October 1, 1958No. Patent Appeal 6359PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WORLEY, Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Assistant Commissioner of Patents, acting for the Commissioner, reversing *954the decision of the Examiner of Interferences, and holding appellee entitled to registration of the mark “Royal Plumage” as applied to hosiery, over the opposition of appellant’s prior registration and use of its mark “Royal Purple” also for hosiery. The record consists of a stipulation of facts together with certain exhibits. We quote therefrom with respect to appellant’s mark:

“Sears adopted and began using a trade-mark comprising the words ‘Royal Purple’, in…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lauritzen & Company, Inc. v. The Borden CompanyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. In Re National Data CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
  2. Tektronix, Inc. v. Daktronics, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
  3. J. R. Wood and Sons, Inc. v. Reese Jewelry CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1960
  4. Application of Dobeckmun Company (The Dow Chemical Company, Assignee, Substituted)Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1961
  5. Pizzeria Uno Corp. v. TempleDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1983

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API