Searle & Hereth Co. v. Warner
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. The appeal in this case is from an interlocutory decree entered December 18, 1900, finding the appellee to be the sole and exclusive owner and. proprietor of the trade-mark, “Pancreopepsine”;’ that such a name is a good, valid and legal trade-mark when applied to a digestive preparation, as ap-pellee has applied it; that appellants in the use of a similar…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. The appeal in this case is from an interlocutory decree entered December 18, 1900, finding the appellee to be the sole and exclusive owner and. proprietor of the trade-mark, “Pancreopepsine”;’ that such a name is a good, valid and legal trade-mark when applied to a digestive preparation, as ap-pellee has applied it; that appellants in the use of a similar digestive preparation, designated “Pancro-Pepsin”, infringed appellee’s exclusive rights to such trade-mark; and enjoining…
1Opinion of the CourtGrosscup, Circuit Judge
The Circuit Court found that, 'aside from the similarity of the term “Pancro-Pepsin” to appellee’s alleged trade-mark, “Pancreopep- • sine”, there was no proof establishing unfair competition.
The record sustains this finding. Appellants’ and appellee’s labels, *675bottles and packages are dissimilar, except in the single instance of the two words indicated. Raying aside the use of these similar words, there would be no room for complaint that appellants were attempting in any unfair way to invade the trade built up by the merit of appellee’s goods, or by his advertising. The case turns,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Elgin National Watch Co. v. Illinois Watch Case Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Lawrence Manufacturing Co. v. Tennessee Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Coats v. Merrick Thread Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Caswell v. . DavisNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Rumford Chemical Works v. MuthU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maryland · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ernie M. Duff v. The Kansas City Star Company, a Corporation, and Emil A. SeesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1962
- Dixi-Cola Laboratories, Inc. v. Coca-Cola Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1941
- Pulitzer Pub. Co. v. Houston Printing Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1926
- Battle Creek Food Co. v. American Pharmaceutical Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1934
- Computing Cheese Cutter Co. v. DunnIndiana Court of Appeals · 1909