Legal Opinion · Dissent

Wincharger Corporation v. Wiancko Engineering Company

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided July 11, 1962No. Patent Appeal 6754Published

1DissentKirkpatrick, Judge

I am unable to agree with the majority in its conclusion that the marks are not confusingly similar. The Board found that “ ‘Winco’ and ‘Wiancko’ are substantially different in appearance, and while they contain some similarity in sound, they are readily distinguishable in that respect.” — a finding adopted by the majority of this court though not in exactly the same terms. Judging by eye and ear, which is necessarily the basic consideration in trademark cases of this kind, I am unable to reach any conclusion other than that the marks are not substantially different in appearance and are not…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. General Aniline & Film Corporation v. Hukill Chemical CorporationCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1961
  2. Barton Manufacturing Co. v. Hercules Powder Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API