d National Cash Register Co. v. American Cash Register Co., 53 Fed. Rep., 367 d National Electric Signaling Co. v. Telefunken Wireless Telegraph Co., 208 Fed. Rep., 679-- Page. 351 299, 302, 304, 305 b National Electric Signaling Co. v. Telefunken Wireless Telegraph Co., 209 Fed. Rep., 856_-_. 306 d National Hollow Brake-Beam Co. v. Interchangeable Brake-Beam Co., 106 Fed. Rep., 693_. 349, 352, 353 d National Tube Co. v. Mark, 216 Fed. Rep., 507_. 276 136, 205 145 d New Departure Bell Co. v. Bevin Bros. Mfg. Co., 64 Fed. Rep., 859__ c New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. Bloomingdale, 59 Fed. Rep., 284. *New South Brewery & Ice Co. In re, 32 App. D. C., 591_ 151 d New York Scaffolding Co. v. Whitney, 224 Fed. Rep., 452. *Newcomb Motor Co. v. Moore, 30 App. D. C., 464_. 353 163 166 351, 352 59, 230 c Nicholas v. Horton, 14 Fed. Rep., 327– **Nix v. Hedden, 149 U. S., 304_ *Norling v. Hayes, 37 App. D. C., 169 c Northwestern Fire Extinguisher Company v. Philadelphia Fire Extinguisher Company, 1 Ban & Ard., 177___. d Novelty Glass Co. v. Brookfield, 170 Fed. Rep., 946_ 0. d Ottumwa Box Car Loader Co. v. Christy Box Car Loader Co., 215 Fed. Rep., 362 351 d Overweight Counterbalance Co. v. Henry Vogt Machine Co., 102 Fed. Rep., 957___ d Pelouze Scale Mfg. Co. v. American Cutlery Co., 102 Fed. Rep., 916___. 105 d Pelton v. Williams, 235 Fed. Rep., 131_ d Pelton Water Wheel Co. v. Doble, 190 Fed. Rep., 760. **Pennock v. Dialogue, 2 Pet., 1 §People v. Luhre, 195 N. Y., 377-- c Pepper v. Labrot et al., 8 Fed. Rep., 29. *Perlman. In re, 39 App. D. C., 447 Phelps. Ex parte, C. D., 1912, 67; 176 O. G., 525. Phelps v. Hardy et al., C. D., 1896, 70; 77 O. G., 631_ *Pierman v. Chisholm, 44 App. D. C., 460__ **Potts v. Creager, 155 U. S., 597– *Podlesak and Podlesak v. McInnerney, 26 App. D. C., 399. Powell v. Pangborn, 161 N. Y., 453; App. Div_-_. 297 351 396 266 5 27 18, 19, 20 11 184, 187 131, 230 86, 349 151 R. **Railroad Co. v. Mellon, 104 U. S., 112_ 395, 396 d Railroad Supply Co. v. Elyria Iron & Steel Co., 213 Fed. Rep., 789- 425 420 c Railroad Supply Co. v. Hart Steel Co., 193 Fed. Rep., 418.. d Railroad Supply Co. v. Hart Steel Co., 222 Fed. Rep., 261__. b Reed v. Cropp Concrete Machinery Company and Cropp, 218 Fed. Rep., 643 Page. 425 425 322 Reed v. Landman, C. D., 1891, 73; 55 O. G., 1275. 8 Rex v. Cutler (English), K. B. N. P., Trinity term, 1816-**Risdon Locomotive Works v. Medart, 158 U. S., 68. 64 102 $Rix v. Sprague Co., 157 Wis., 572_. 151 **Roberts v. Ryer, 91 U. S., 150. 157, 425 *Rookwood Pottery Co. v. Wilhelm Co., 43 App. D. C., 1.– d Rowley Co. v. Columbus Co., 220 Fed. Rep., 127__. *Royal Tailors v. J. M. Robinson, Norton & Co., 45 App. D. C., 14- 275 179 **Rubber Co. v. Goodyear, 9 Wall., 788. **Russell v. Place, 94 U. S., 606_ Russia Cement Co. v. Frauenhar, 133 Fed. Rep., 518_. d Ryder v. Schlichter, 126 Fed. Rep., 487. S. b Salt's Textile Mfg. Co. v. Tingue Mfg. Co., 227 Fed. Rep., 115_. d Sanders v. Hancock, 128 Fed. Rep., 424_- 297 420 243, 267 117 352 351 Sauers Milling Company. Ex parte, C. D., 1907, 231; 129 O. G., 3161– 176 158 d Scaife & Sons Co. v. Falls City Woolen Mills, 209 Fed. Rep., 210__. 26 d Schiebel Co. v. Clark, 217 Fed. Rep., 760....... 276 *Schoenhofen Co. v. Maltine Co., 30 App. D. C., 340_ 170 *Schutte. In re, 44 App. D. C., 299_ 358 *Scott. In re, 25 App. D. C., 307_. 154 Service Railroad Co. v. Hamilton, &c., Co., 8 Canadian Exch. Reports, 381_ d Sheffield Car Co. v. D'Arcy, 194 Fed. Rep., 686_ § Sheldon v. Patterson, 55 Ill., 507-_ *Simplex Electric Heating Co. v. Gold Car Heating & Lighting Company, *Slingluff v. Sweet and Spinasse, 45 App. D. C., 302_ 241, 313 419 201 230 d Sly Mfg. Co., W. W., v. Russell & Co., 189 Fed. Rep., 61 67, 68, 351 d Smart v. Wright, 227 Fed. Rep., 84-- 325 **Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co., 93 U. S., 486---- 284, 286, 352, 387 d Stafford Company v. Coldwell-Gildard Co., 202 Fed. Rep., 744 b Stahlbrodt Co. v. Ford Motor Co., 233 Fed. Rep., 678_. *Stanbon v. Howe, 34 App. D. C., 418_ § Star Company, The, v. The Wheeler Syndicate, Inc., 6 Trade-Mark Rep., 425___ d Stearns v. Russell, 85 Fed. Rep., 218__ 289 277 113, 184, 187 4 66, 67 **Steinmetz v. Allen, 192 U. S., 543. *Stewart v. Thomas, 42 App. D. C., 222. c Stonmetz Co. v. Brown, etc., 57 Fed. Rep., 601. **Stout v. Lye, 103 U. S., 66–. **Stow v. Chicago, 104 U. S., 547-- b Stratton v. Hughes, 211 Fed. Rep., 557_. **Straus v. Notaseme Co., 240 U. S., 179_. **Straus v. Victor Talking Machine Co., 243 U. S., 490– *Swihart v. Mauldin, 19 App. D. C., 570. T. d Thacher v. Transit Co., 234 Fed. Rep., 640_. *Thomson v. Weston, 19 App. D. C., 373_ *Thum Co., O. & W., v. Dickinson, 46 App. D. C., 306– §Tiedemann v. Tiedemann, 35 Nev., 259-. c Tire Co. v. Lozier, 84 Fed. Rep., 659_. Page. 320, 415 184, 187 325 419 157 151 168 403 115 276 20 206 151 102 353 92, 95, 349 Tropenas. Ex parte, C. D., 1900, 14; 90 O. G., 749. 36 306 c Tompkins v. Terwilliger, 124 Fed. Rep., 545**Topliff v. Topliff, 145, U. S., 156 b Twinlock Case, 220 Fed. Rep., 325_. U. **Union Paper Bag Machine Co. et al. v. Murphy, 97 U. S., 120. *United Drug Company. In re, 44 App. D. C., 209_ 353 200, 206 **United States v. American Bell Telephone Co.,*167 U. S., 224__ 391, 396 59, 230 d Universal Draft Gear Co. v. Bush, 220 Fed. Rep., 300 175 V. d Ventilated Cushion & Spring Co. v. D'Arcy, 229 Fed. Rep., 398 313 b Victor Talking Machine Co. v. Thomas A. Edison, Inc., C. D., 1915, 50; 221 O. G., 351 26 b Victor Talking Machine Co. v. Straus et al., 222 Fed. Rep., 524_. d Victor Talking Machine Co. v. Straus et al., 225 Fed. Rep., 535 405 405 W. d Warren v. Casey, 93 Fed. Rep., 963 352 **Washburn & Moen Manufacturing Co. v. The Beat 'Em All Barbed Wire Co., 143 U. S., 275__ 391 Watson v. Judge, 40 Mich., 729 151 d Weber Electric Co. v. National Gas & Electric Co., 212 Fed. Rep., 950___ *Webster v. Sanford, C. D., 1888, 92; 44 O. G., 567. 27 **Webster Loom Co. v. Higgins, 105 U. S., 580__ c Westinghouse v. Chartiers Valley Gas Co., 43 Fed. Rep., 582_ d Westinghouse Air Brake Co. v. New York Air Brake Co., 119 Fed. Rep., 874 **Winans v. Denmead, 15 How., 330. c Wire Book Sewing Machine Co. v. Stevenson, 11 Fed. Rep., 155_ *Woods v. Poor, 29 App. D. C., 397 Y. **Yale Lock Mfg. Co. v. Greenleaf, 117 U. S., 554 c Yale & Towne Mfg. Co. v. Adler, 154 Fed. Rep., 37-- Z. d Zittlosen Mfg. Co. v. Boss, 219 Fed. Rep., 887-- Page. 65, 353, 396 325 201 166 344 221, 235 395 77 353 DECISIONS OF THE EXAMINER OF INTERFERENCES FOR THE YEAR 1917. STAR COMPANY V. FISHER. Decided December 22, 1916. 236 O. G., 283. TRADE-MARKS-PERSONAL MARKS-NOT TRANSFERABLE. "Mutt and Jeff" Held to be a personal trade-mark incapable of assignment because identified in the mind of the public with the genius and skill of a particular individual. TRADE-MARK FOR CARTOONS. Mr. John T. Sturdevant and Mr. Bainbridge Colby and Mr. Morrison T. Hawkins for the Star Company. Mr. Charles E. Kelley and Mr. Cornelius C. Billings for Fisher. STAUFFER, Examiner of Interferences: This is an application of the Star Company for cancelation of the mark" Mutt and Jeff " registered March 9, 1915, by Harry C. Fisher as a trade-mark for a series of cartoons. The substantial allegation of the petitioner is that this mark was unlawfully registered by the registrant because the petitioner is and always has been the owner thereof. The important facts of this case are either admitted by the parties or are clearly shown by the evidence. Harry C. Fisher, the registrant, was employed for sometime prior to November, 1907, by the San Francisco Chronicle, a newspaper published in San Francisco, California, as a cartoonist or comic artist. On November 15, 1907, there first appeared in that paper a comic strip or cartoon drawn by him in which the character "A Mutt" was the principal feature. Cartoons in which this character and others 16644°-18- -3 1 |