American Grinder Mfg. Co. v. Walden-Worcester, Inc.

D.C. Circuit

American Grinder Mfg. Co. v. Walden-Worcester, Inc.

285 F. 1007, 52 App. D.C. 273, 1923 U.S. App. LEXIS 2660

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJanuary 2, 1923

DocketNo. 1525

StatusPublished

This text of 285 F. 1007 (American Grinder Mfg. Co. v. Walden-Worcester, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Grinder Mfg. Co. v. Walden-Worcester, Inc., 285 F. 1007, 52 App. D.C. 273, 1923 U.S. App. LEXIS 2660 (D.C. Cir. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

ROBB, Associate Justice.

Appeal from concurrent decisions of the Patent Office tribunals canceling appellant’s registration of the word “Blackhawk” as a trade-mark for socket wrenches, on the ground of conflict between that mark and appellee’s mark “Tomahawk,” used on the same class of goods. “Blackhawk” was adopted in May of 4919.

As early as 1914 appellee adopted and since has extensively usfed the word “Tomahawk” as a trade-mark for socket wrenches. C. N. and F. W. Jonas acted as agents or distributors for appellee on the Pacific Coast from 1914 to 1918, and in the Middle West territory from 1916 to 1918, when, at the instance of appellee, the relationship was severed. Thereafter the Jonas brothers became identified with the appellant company, which commenced to manufacture and sell wrenches in competition with appellee. It was then that the trade-mark “Blade-hawk” was adopted.

We agree with the Patent Office that the marks are so sufficiently similar as to be likely to create confusion, and, as we have intimated in prior decisions, the circumstances indicate strongly a purpose and intent on the part of appellant to reap some benefit from the established trade of the appellee.

The dedsion is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

ROBB, Associate Justice.

Appeal from concurrent decisions of the Patent Office tribunals canceling appellant’s registration of the word “Blackhawk” as a trade-mark for socket wrenches, on the ground of conflict between that mark and appellee’s mark “Tomahawk,” used on the same class of goods. “Blackhawk” was adopted in May of 4919.

As early as 1914 appellee adopted and since has extensively usfed the word “Tomahawk” as a trade-mark for socket wrenches. C. N. and F. W. Jonas acted as agents or distributors for appellee on the Pacific Coast from 1914 to 1918, and in the Middle West territory from 1916 to 1918, when, at the instance of appellee, the relationship was severed. Thereafter the Jonas brothers became identified with the appellant company, which commenced to manufacture and sell wrenches in competition with appellee. It was then that the trade-mark “Blade-hawk” was adopted.

We agree with the Patent Office that the marks are so sufficiently similar as to be likely to create confusion, and, as we have intimated in prior decisions, the circumstances indicate strongly a purpose and intent on the part of appellant to reap some benefit from the established trade of the appellee.

The dedsion is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 F. 1007, 52 App. D.C. 273, 1923 U.S. App. LEXIS 2660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-grinder-mfg-co-v-walden-worcester-inc-cadc-1923.