Legal Opinion

In re Kahan & Weisz Jewelry Mfg. Corp.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided January 16, 1975No. Patent Appeal No. 74-546PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BALDWIN, Judge.

• This appeal is from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board1 affirming the examiner’s refusal to register the mark DUCHARME2 as a trademark for watches on the Principar Register. We reverse.

The examiner refused registration under the Lanham Act, section 2(e)(3) (15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(3)) on the ground that DUCHARME is primarily merely a surname. The board affirmed the refusal to register while adding, “[mjoreover, ‘DUCHARME’ is admittedly a surname *832and while it may well be, as applicant in substance contends, a rare surname, Section 2(e)(3) of the Statute makes no…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Application of Standard Elektrik Lorenz AktiengesellschaftCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Lane Capital Management, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee v. Lane Capital Management, Inc., Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
  2. United States v. Sidney Levine and Mpd Film Productions, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
  3. In Re Etablissements Darty Et FileCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
  4. In Re Hutchinson Technology IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
  5. In re Harris-Intertype Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975

12 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