The Kalart Company, Inc. v. The Camera-Mart, Inc.

Appellant’s mark “Kalart” is arbitrary and nowise descriptive or suggestive of the goods to which it is applied. We have repeatedly held that in cases like this a greater difference is necessary, in sound, meaning and appearance, to avoid the likelihood of confusion with a mark previously owned and in use by another engaged in the sale of identical goods. See, for example, Lauritzen & Co., Inc., v. Borden Co., 239 F.2d 405, 44 C.C.P.A., Patents, 720; Smith v. Tobacco ByProducts & Chemical Corp., 243 F.2d 188, 44 C.C.P.A., Patents, 880; W. E. Kauten-berg Co. v. Ekco Products Co., 251 F.2d 628,…