Legal Opinion
Application of the Realistic Company
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided May 13, 1971No. Patent Appeal 8529PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ALMOND, Judge.
This appeal is from a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, 159 USPQ 445 (1968), affirming the examiner’s refusal to register “CURV’ ” as a trademark for permanent wave curling solutions 1 on the ground that the mark *1394is merely descriptive of applicant’s goods within the meaning of section 2(e) (1) Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U. S.C. § 1052(e).
Appellant has attacked the board’s decision on several grounds, most of them unsound. However, in the main, appellant contends that CURV’ is not merely descriptive of permanent wave curling solutions. We agree, and, therefore,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- In Re W. A. Sheaffer Pen Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
- In re General Permanent Wave Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1941
- The Wella Corporation v. La Maur, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re Abcor Development Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- King-Size, Inc. v. Frank's King Size Clothes, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1982
- Louis Rich, Inc. v. Horace W. Longacre, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
- The Driving Force, Inc. v. Manpower, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
- In re Reynolds Metals Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.