Alaska Northwest Publishing Co., an Alaska Corporation v. A. T. Publishing Co. And Frank Martone

458 F.2d 387, 173 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 3, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11046
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 29, 1972
Docket71-1618
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 458 F.2d 387 (Alaska Northwest Publishing Co., an Alaska Corporation v. A. T. Publishing Co. And Frank Martone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alaska Northwest Publishing Co., an Alaska Corporation v. A. T. Publishing Co. And Frank Martone, 458 F.2d 387, 173 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 3, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11046 (9th Cir. 1972).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Alaska Northwest Publishing Co. brought this action against A. T. Publishing Co. and Frank Martone to recover damages and obtain injunctive relief for trademark infringement and unfair competition. The litigation involves the similarity of names of plaintiff’s and defendants’ respective magazines. Defendants moved to dismiss the action for failure of the amended complaint to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and for other reasons. Plaintiff responded with a motion for summary judgment.

After argument on these motions and the allowance of additional time for the filing of documents, the district court entered an order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and purporting to grant defendants’ motion to dismiss, 319 F.Supp. 963. But since matters outside the pleading were presented to and not excluded by *388 the court, the order must be treated as one granting summary judgment for defendants. The fact that defendants did not file a cross motion for summary judgment is immaterial where, as here, all parties had notice of the issues. See IHC, Inc. v. Affiliated FM Insurance Company, 451 F.2d 758, note 1 (10th Cir. 1971).

A motion for summary judgment may not be granted where there is a genuine issue as to a material fact. See Rule 56(c), F.R.Civ.P. Plaintiff argues, in effect, that here there were genuine issues as to material facts on both the trademark infringement and unfair competition claims. We agree. Accordingly, the order dismissing the action is reversed and the cause is remanded for trial.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Alderman v. Iditarod Properties, Inc.
32 P.3d 373 (Alaska Supreme Court, 2001)
Ging v. Showtime Entertainment, Inc.
570 F. Supp. 1080 (D. Nevada, 1983)
In re Nantucket Inc.
677 F.2d 95 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1982)
American Ass'n for Advancement of Science v. Hearst Corp.
498 F. Supp. 244 (District of Columbia, 1980)
Cebu Ass'n of California, Inc. v. Santo Nino De Cebu USA, Inc.
95 Cal. App. 3d 129 (California Court of Appeal, 1979)
MacPhail v. Stevens
586 P.2d 1339 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
458 F.2d 387, 173 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 3, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alaska-northwest-publishing-co-an-alaska-corporation-v-a-t-publishing-ca9-1972.