Legal Opinion

Omag Optik Und Mechanik A. G. v. Weinstein

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided March 22, 1949PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KNOX, Chief Judge..This suit concerns defendant’s use of the trade-mark “Omag” on certain photographic items in the United States and in certain foreign countries. Plaintiff also claims damages against defendant.

The plaintiff, Omag Optik und Mechanik A. G., is a Swiss corporation engaged in the manufacture of photographic and optical items in that country. The firm was organized in 1925, under the name Optik und Mechanik A. G. The initials of the words of that title spell out “Omag,” and, in 193!, the name was changed to its pres ent form. At plaintiff’s instance, the trademark Omag was…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Menendez v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. George W. Luft Co. v. Zande Cosmetic Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
  3. Shaver v. Heller & Merz Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
  4. United States Ozone Co. v. United States Ozone Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1932
  5. Scandinavia Belting Co. v. Asbestos & Rubber Works of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd. v. Lazoff Bros., Inc.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1982
  2. Wrist-Rocket Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. SaundersDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1974
  3. Haggar International Corp. v. United Co. for Food Industry Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 2012
  4. Blue Planet Software, Inc. v. Games International, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
  5. Spencer v. VDO Instruments, Ltd.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API