Legal Opinion
G.D. Searle & Co. v. Hudson Pharmaceutical Corporation, G.D. Searle & Co., in No. 82-5600. Hudson Pharmaceutical Corp., in No. 82-5621
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided August 29, 1983No. 82-5600, 82-5621PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
LOUIS H. POLLAK, District Judge.
I
Plaintiff Searle and defendant Hudson are pharmaceutical firms. This controversy, arising under pertinent provisions of the Lanham Act, 1 centers on a vegetable laxative — psyllium hydrophilic mucilloid — produced by both firms. Since 1934 Searle has marketed psyllium hydrophilic mucilloid under the registered trademark METAMUCIL; a highly profitable product, METAMUCIL has been responsible for $275,000,-000 in sales since 1970. Hudson began marketing psyllium hydrophilic mucilloid in 1964. Its first proposed trade name was REGUCIL, but when…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Canal Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Saxlehner v. Eisner & Mendelson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Champion Spark Plug Co. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Prestonettes, Inc. v. CotySupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- R. G. Smith, Doing Business Under the Name and Style of Ta'ron, Inc., and International Fragrances, Inc. v. Chanel, Inc., and Chanel Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Pebble Beach Co. v. Tour 18 I Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998
- Versa Products Company, Inc. v. Bifold Company (Manufacturing) Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- Merck & Co. v. Mediplan Health Consulting, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Pebble Beach Co. v. Tour 18 I, Ltd.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1996
- August Storck K.G. And Storck Usa, L.P. v. Nabisco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.