Deering Harvester Co. v. Whitman & Barnes Mfg. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio. This Is a bill to restrain the defendants from using a multitude of alleged trade-marks first adopted and used by complainant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio. This Is a bill to restrain the defendants from using a multitude of alleged trade-marks first adopted and used by complainant. The defense was that the letters and numerals so adopted and used were not adopted or used as trademarks, and did not serve the purpose of trade-marks, but were definitions of things, and had no significance in designating the origin or manufacturer of the parts so identified. The defense, upon the pleadings and evidence, was sustained, and the bill dismissed. The evidence shows that…
1Opinion of the CourtLurton, Circuit Judge
The evidence makes it clear that the system of using letters and numerals upon the parts composing the structures made and sold by the Deering Harvester Company and their predecessors in business was originally adopted and used with no other purpose than to conveniently designate the size, shape, and capacity of the article, and to distinguish it from other parts, sizes, shapes, and adaptability, and with no intention or expectation to thereby indicate its origin or manufacture. That such mark or symbol must be designed, as its primary object and purpose, to distinguish each of the articles…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Canal Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Columbia Mill Co. v. AlcornSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Lawrence Manufacturing Co. v. Tennessee Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Manufacturing Co. v. TrainerSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Amoskeag Manufacturing Co. v. SpearThe Superior Court of New York City · 1849
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Mathews Conveyer Co. v. Palmer-Bee Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
- Electric Auto-Lite Co. v. P. & D. MFG. CO.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
- Williams v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- Italian Swiss Colony v. Italian Vineyard Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
- American Safety Table Company, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee v. Joseph Schreiber and David Goldberg, Individually and as Partners Trading as Schreiber & Goldberg, Defendants-Appellees-Appellants. American Safety Table Company, Inc. v. Joseph Schreiber and David Goldberg, Individually and as Partners Trading as Schreiber & GoldbergCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.