Phillips v. Hudnut
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Appeal from a Decision of an Assistant Commissioner of Patents. Trade-mark interference proceeding between Thomas W. S. Phillips and Richard FCudnut and another. From a decision in favor of Fludnut, Phillips appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
SMYTH, Chief Justice.
This is an interference involving the right of Hudnut to obtain the registration of the word “Nara” as trade-mark for toilet articles such as talcum, sachet, and face powder. Phillips had registered the word “Nyra” and Mack the word “Myra” as marks *644for goods of the same descriptive properties. The Examiner of Interferences held that the respective marks were one and the same, and awarded priority to Hudnut. He was affirmed by the Assistant Commissioner. After the decision of priority was announced by the Examiner, Hudnut filed a' motion requesting him to adjudge that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. SteffensSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- American Washboard Co. v. Saginaw Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
- Macmahan Pharmacal Co. v. Denver Chemical Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
3Cited by16 opinions
- La Societe Anonyme Des Parfums Le Galion v. Jean Patou, Inc. And Michael Stramiello, Jr., Collector of Customs of the Portof New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- United States Ozone Co. v. United States Ozone Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1932
- E. F. Prichard Co. v. Consumers Brewing Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
- Blue Bell, Inc. v. Jaymar-Ruby, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Huber Baking Company v. Stroehmann Brothers Company and Quality Bakers of America Cooperative, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.