Legal Opinion

Clairol, Incorporated v. Roux Distributing Co., Inc

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided July 13, 1960No. Patent Appeal 6498PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

The Assistant Commissioner (118 U. S.P.Q. 378) reversed the decision of the Examiner of Interferences and held that Registration No. 565,410 of the mark “Hair Color Bath” for “Hair tinting and coloring preparations” granted to appellant on the Supplemental Register should be cancelled.

Appellee’s petition for cancellation was filed under section 24 of the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1092, and alleges that the mark “Hair Color Bath” is descriptive of the goods and was not used as a trademark at the time the registration was secured. Section 24 gives any person who…

2Cited by16 opinions

  1. In Re Northland Aluminum Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
  2. Roux Laboratories, Inc. v. Clairol IncorporatedCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  3. In re Water Gremlin Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1980
  4. Blanchard Importing & Distributing Co., Inc. v. Societe E. Blanchard Et FilsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968
  5. ActiveVideo Networks, Inc., Trademark Trial and Appeal Board2014

11 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