Quaker City Flour Mills Co. v. Quaker Oats Co.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing on an appeal from a decision of the Commissioner of Patents refusing to register a mark as a trademark for flour. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Van Orsdel
Appellant, Quaker City Flour Mills Company, appeals from a decision of the Commissioner of Patents in an interference proceeding wherein its application for registration of the word “Quaker” as a trademark for flour was refused.
Registrations of the word “Quaker” for flour and flour products extend back to 1895. As no evidence of abandonment of these marks appears, they must be presumed to be still in use. The tribunals of the Patent Office did not consider it necessary to pass upon the question of priority, concerning which a largo volume of testimony was taken, for the reason that it does…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Walter Baker & Co. v. DelapenhaU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1908
- Bass, Ratcliff & Gretton, Ltd. v. FeigenspanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1899
- Walter Baker & Co. v. Puritan Pure Food Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1905
3Cited by4 opinions
- Application of Servel IncCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
- Kraft Cheese Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944
- Matter of the Application of Continental Distilling Corporation (Two Cases)Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
- Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Minnesota Linseed Oil Paint Co. (Now by Change of Name Minnesota Paints, Inc.), Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Minnesota Linseed Oil Paint Co. (Now by Change of Name Minnesota Paints, Inc.), Minnesota Linseed Oil Paint Co. (Now by Change of Name Minnesota Paints, Inc.) v. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956