Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bristol-Myers Company v. Pharmaco, Inc.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided July 21, 1961No. Patent Appeal 6696Published

1DissentSmith, Judge

This dissent is based on my opinion that there is not such similarity between the marks “Bufferin” and “Buffagum” as to be likely to cause confusion or mistake or deception of purchasers. Similarity is found in the identical initial syllables of the marks. I agree with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that such similarity does not warrant sustaining the opposition where the marks are otherwise so different.

In addition to the differences in the names, the goods are specifically different. “Bufferin” is a medicinal tablet and “Buffagum” is a medicinal chewing gum. Opposer’s registration…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Schering & Glatz, Inc. v. Sharp & Dohme, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
  2. Steem-Electric Corp. v. Herzfeld-Phillipson Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940
  3. Miles Laboratories, Inc. v. Foley & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
  4. North Star Mfg. Co. v. Wells Lamont Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
  5. Alumatone Corp. v. Vita-Var Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API