Parfumerie Roger & Gallet v. M. C. M. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
We assume arguendo that both the trade-marks, “Bouquet des Amours” and “Eleurs d’Amours,” are proper marks of origin, acquired by valid user, and that the Trade-Mark Convention of April 19,1869, did not invalidate them. Granting so much, in our judgment the plaintiff has failed to prove any infringement of either by the use of “Charme d’Amour,” or of “Caresse d’Amour.” Prima facie, the source of origin of the products sold under them is indicated by the mark taken as a whole; one who uses less than that whole may perhaps infringe, but, if so, it must appear that the part he has taken…
2Cited by16 opinions
- National Distillers Products Co. v. Refreshment Brands, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Coca-Cola Co. v. Carlisle Bottling WorksDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1929
- Scott Paper Co. v. Scott's Liquid Gold, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1977
- Beech-Nut, Inc. v. Warner-Lambert CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1972
- Chester Barrie, Ltd. v. the Chester Laurie, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1960
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.