Legal Opinion · Concurrence
Armour and Company v. Organon, Inc.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 25, 1957No. Patent Appeal 6266Published
1ConcurrenceRich, Judge
I concur in the result reached by the majority but I do so for my own reasons, which I here set forth.
Although the Examiner of Interferences erroneously said in his opinion that “confusing similarity of marks” was the issue, he was not confused in fact. Later on in his opinion he said,
“It is noted that applicant argued that said decided case [Thymo-Borine v. Winthrop, 69 U.S.P.Q. 512] and the other cases listed by opposer * * * involved registrations, which is not the case here."
He then said:
“In principle, Examiner can see no distinction here as drawn by applicant; namely, between the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Van Camp Sea Food Co. v. Alexander B. Stewart OrganizationsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
- Thymo Borine Laboratory v. Winthrop Chemical Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
- Battle Creek Food Co. v. American Pharmaceutical Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1934