Trade-marks-Continued. Evidence, consideration by the Commissioner of Patents, of certified copies Foreign registration, effect of. Rossmann v. Garnier........ Goods of same descriptive properties. *H. Wolf & Sons v. Lord & Taylor. What constitutes. d Rossmann v. Garnier... Interest in mark must be shown to entitle opposer to hearing. *Tim Judgment by default, priority awarded to applicant, but registration The word "Troy" for shirts and collars. *Tim & Co. v. Cluett, Pea- Renewal of registration, assertion of owner of continued use and title to Request for renewal not subject to examination as an original case. *Ewing, 205 205 91 Similarity of marks— **Thaddeus Davids Company v. Davids and Davids, trading as Davids 367 Color not claimed, difference immaterial to question. *Barclay and 97 Star upon which is superimposed a circle, for saws, refused registration upon Suits for infringement, judicial notice not taken of foreign uses and customs, 101 223 Trade-marks-Continued. Page. Surname not subject of exclusive use as common-law trade-mark. **Thaddeus Davids Company v. Davids and Davids, trading as Davids Manufacturing Company.. 367 Ten-years clause In no way detracts from force of provision against immoral or scandalous 367 223 Names of persons, firms, or corporations, descriptive and geographical terms, registrable under. **Thaddeus Davids Company v. Davids and Davids, trading as Davis Manufacturing Company.. The word 367 "Abricotine," with the initials "P. G.," on a tabaret or shield infringed 223 "Arab" for sardines, registrable, not a geographical term. Ex parte 24 "Cumfy-Cut," for knit undershirts, registrable, not a descriptive word. *In re 151 "Gold Bond," for clothes, refused registration on prior use. "Hydronon," for bituminous paint, refused registration on the word Use of mark on boxes containing goods, but not on goods themselves, not trade-mark use. *Tim & Co. v. Cluett, Peabody & Co...... 183 Validity of mark— Long-continued use resolves all doubts in favor of user. W. A. Law- 76 Representation of cow, for cheese. W. A. Lawrence & Son v. The 76 V. Validity of patent: Determination of on demurrer. d Krell Auto Grand Piano Co. of America v. Story & Clark Co. et al.. 246 Patentable combination. d Krell Auto Grand Piano Co. of America v. 246 CASES CITED. The opinion of the Attorney-General is indicated by a double dagger (†), the decisions of the State Courts by a section mark (§), of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia by the letter (a), of the United States District Courts by the letter (b), of the United States Circuit Courts by the letter (c), of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia by one star (*), of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals by the letter (d), and of the Supreme Court of the United States by two stars (**).} A. Allen v. Rawson, 1 M., G., & S., 551............. **Adams v. Bellaire Stamping Co., 141 U. S., 539.. d Adams Electric Ry. Co., v. Lindell Ry. Co., 77 Fed. Rep., 432. **Agawam Company v. Jordan, 7 Wall., 583.. *Alexander v. Blackman, 26 App. D. C., 541. d American Co. v. Hickmott Co., 142 Fed. Rep., 141.... 223 335 17 137 17 325 d American Fiber-Chamois Co. v. Buckskin Fiber Co., 72 Fed. Rep., *American Glue Co. In re, 27 App. D. C., 391... c American Grocery Co. v. Bennett, Sloan & Co., 68 Fed. Rep., 539.. 126 249 249 81 281 d Anderson v. Potts, 108 Fed. Rep., 379. 240 *Anti-Cori-Zine Chemical Co. In re, 34 App. D. C., 191.. **Andrews et al. v. Hovey, 124 U. S., 694. d Armour Packing Co. v. United States, 153 Fed. Rep., d Atlas Mfg. Co. et al. v. Street and Smith, 204 Fed. Rep., 398 c Avery v. Case, 139 Fed. Rep., 878. 39 152 278 354 321 d Avery v. Case, 148 Fed. Rep., 214. B. 321 c Badische Anilin & Soda Fabrik v. A. Klipstein & Co., 125 Fed. Rep., 543... Baltzley v. Seeberger, C. D., 1905, 120; 115 O. G., 1329.. 270 33, 34, 91 Barber & Co. Ex parte, 81 MS. Dec., 221 78 d Barnes Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. Walworth Mfg. Co., 60 Fed. Rep., 605... *Battle Creek Sanitarium Co. v. Fuller, 30 App. D. C., 411. 184, 185 *Beals v. Finkenbiner, 12 App. D. C., 23.. 136 d Beer v. Walbridge, 100 Fed. Rep., 465.. 249 **Belding Mfg. Co. v. Challenge Corn Planter Co., 152 U. S., 100............ 335 c Benjamin Menu Card Co. v. Rand, McNally & Co., 210 Fed. Rep., 285.. Page. Bogen v. Leonard, 100 MS. Dec., 300..... 63 d Borden Ice-Cream Co. v. Borden's Condensed Milk Co., 201 Fed. Rep., 510.. 79 *Brill v. **Brill v. Brinkman. Ex parte, 112 MS. Dec., 128... Brown v. Campbell, C. D., 1914, 37; 201 O. G., 903. **Brown v. Davis, 116 U. S., 237.. **Brown v. Piper, 91 U. S., 37.. d Brown v. Stilwell Co., 57 Fed. Rep., 732 324 102 281 75 176 325 Washington Railway & Electric Co., 30 App. D. C., 255.. 157 Washington Railway & Electric Co., 215 U. S., 527. 265 30 170 320 249 304 **Brown Chemical Company v. Meyer, 139 U. S., 540.. 147, 369 c Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. Klumpp, 126 Fed. Rep., 765.. 249 c Buckingham v. Iron Co., 51 Fed. Rep., 236.. 249 d Bundy v. Detroit, 94 Fed. Rep., 524... 243 c Burdett-Rowntree Mfg. Co. v. Standard Plunger Elevator Co., 196 Fed. Rep., 43.. 254 d Burdett-Rowntree Mfg. Co. v. Standard Plunger Elevator Co., 197 Fed. Rep., d C., B. & Q. R. Co. v. United States, 211 Fed. Rep., 12. *Cahn, Belt & Co. In re, 27 App. D. C., 173... *Carmel Wine Co. v. California Winery, 38 App. D. C., 1. d Charles Boldt Co. v. Nivison, 194 Fed. Rep., 871..... Charles, Prince de Löwenstein, C. D., 1904, 24; 108 O. G., d Chinnock v. Patterson Tel. Co., 112 Fed. Rep., 531.. a Coca-Cola Co. v. Deacon Brown Bottling Co. et al., 200 Fed. Rep., 105.. a Coca-Cola Co. v. Nashville Syrup Co., 200 Fed. Rep., 153.. Page. **Columbia Mill Co. v. Alcorn, 150 U. S., 460.. Collins Co. In re, C. D., 1872, 251; 2 O. G., 617.. d Columbia Motor Car Co. v. Duerr & Co., 184 Fed. Rep., 893. d Comptograph Company v. Burroughs Adding Mach. Co., 183 Fed. Rep., 321. c Conley v. Marum, 83 Fed. Rep., 309.. d Conley v. Marum, 84 Fed. Rep., 990.. d Consolidated Rubber Tire Co. v. Diamond Rubber Co. of New York, 157 Fed. 324 184 255 157 249 249 157 358, 362, 363 d Consolidated Rubber Tire Co. v. Diamond Rubber Co. of New York, 162 Fed. 358, 362, 363 d Consolidated Rubber Tire Co. v. Finley Rubber Tire Co., 116 Fed. Rep., 358, 362 c Consolidated Rubber Tire Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 147 Fed. Rep., 358, 362 d Consolidated Rubber Tire Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 151 Fed. Rep., 358, 362 c Consolidated Rubber Tire Company and The Rubber Tire Wheel Co., D. B. **Consolidated Valve Co. v. Crosby Valve Co., 113 U. S., 157. **Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co., 210 U. S., 414..... **Corbin Co. v. Eagle Co., 150 U. S., 38. 362 282 293 304, 305, 306 183, 319, 320, 323 99 63, 282 63 d Crown Cork & Seal Company v. Aluminum Stopper Company, 108 Fed. Rep., *Cutler v. Leonard, 31 App. D. C., 297.... D. **Dainese v. Hale, 91 U. S., 13.. Davids & Co. Ex parte, C. D., 1879, 107; 16 O. G., 94.... c Davids Co., Thaddeus, v. Davids et al., 190 Fed. Rep., 285.. 231 68 227 227, 369 c Diamond Match Co. v. Ruby Match Co., 127 Fed. Rep., 341.... Rubber Tire Wheel Co., 220 U. S., 428. 137 254 222, 258, 291, 358, 363, 364 §Dixon v. Moyer, 4 Wash., 68.. **Dobson v. Lees, 137 U. S., 258. d Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. Superior Drill Co., 115 Fed. Rep., 886.. **Du Bois v. Kirk, 158 U. S., 58. Dudley & Co., U. H. Ex parte, C. D., 1913, 128; 191 O. G., 586.. d Duncan v. Cincinnati Co., 171 Fed. Rep., 656.. |