Legal Opinion
Hygienic Products Co. v. Coe
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided June 1, 1936No. 6467PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.
Appellant company, plaintiff below, appeals from a decree of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia dismissing its bill in a suit brought under section 4915, R.S., as ^amended (35 U.S.C.A. § 63), to require the Commissioner of Patents to register a trade-mark for cleaning powder for water closet bowls and automobile radiators.
At the threshold we are confronted with a question of jurisdiction; namely, whether a defeated applicant for registration of a trade-mark must first appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents to the United States Court of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- A. Leschen & Sons Rope Co. v. Broderick & Bascom Rope Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- United States Ex Rel. Baldwin Co. v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Baldwin Co. v. R. S. Howard Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- American Steel Foundries v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Layton Pure Food Co. v. Church & Dwight Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Procter & Gamble Co. v. J. L. Prescott Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
- Proctor & Gamble Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Marcalus Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1958
- Marcalus Manufacturing Co. v. WatsonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1957
- Barbasol Co. v. JacobsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1947
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.