Legal Opinion
Daytona Automotive Fiberglass v. Fiberfab, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 13, 1979No. Civ. A. 77-621PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DIAMOND, District Judge.
Daytona Automotive Fiberglass (Daytona), a Florida corporation, brought this action against Fiberfab, Inc. (Fiberfab), a California corporation, seeking various relief on the grounds, inter alia, that the defendant engaged in unfair competition in infringing the trademark “Migi” allegedly owned by the plaintiff. 1 Jurisdiction is based on diversity, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) and the Lanham Trade-Mark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.
The matter presently under consideration by the court is defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment under Rule 56, Fed.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents v. E. Leitz, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1958
- Benjamin D. Smith, Jr., and Howerton Gowen Company, Inc. (Black Panther Company, Inc., Assignee, Substituted) v. Coahoma Chemical Company, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1959
3Cited by2 opinions
- Richard Royce Collection Ltd. v. New York City Shoes, Inc. (In Re New York City Shoes, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
- El Sombrero Corp. v. BolivarAppellate Court of Illinois · 1982