American Manufacturing Company of Texas v. The Heald MacHine Company

In substance, all the majority opinion says by way of explaining why it affirms is that it agrees with the reasoning of the board.1 2**I cannot find in the board’s opinion any rationalization of why it thought confusion would be likely. The opinion merely recites some of the stipulated facts 2 and then states the conclusion that confusion is likely. No doubt the board based its conclusion on the obvious similarities of the marks as a whole and its holding that the goods are “substantially the same.” It then cited In re Dobeckmun Co., 286 F.2d 187, 48 CCPA 810, which I consider no precedent…