Legal Opinion
Smithkline Beckman Corp. v. Pennex Products Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided February 21, 1985No. Civ. A. 84-0913PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JAMES McGIRR KELLY, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, Smithkline Beckman Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiary Men ley and James Laboratories, Inc. (Smithkline) have filed suit against Pennex Products Company (Pennex) for trademark infringement and unfair competition claims pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1125(a) and Pennsylvania Unfair Competition laws. 1 The matter presently before the court is defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment.
A. FACTS
As anyone who has suffered from the excruciating pain of a throbbing headache will agree, aspirin is truly…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Perfect Fit Industries, Inc. v. Acme Quilting Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Sk&f, Co. v. Premo Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Levi Strauss & Co. v. Blue Bell, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Ideal Toy Corporation v. Plawner Toy Mfg. Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Birthright v. Birthright, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1993
- Pharmacia Corp. v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2002
- American Home Products Corp. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1987
- Fontaine v. Home Box Office, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 1986
- Home Box Office, Inc. v. Corinth Motel, Inc.District Court, N.D. Mississippi · 1986
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.