Clark Equipment Co. v. Weeks

D.C. Circuit

Clark Equipment Co. v. Weeks

215 F.2d 678, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 426

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedFebruary 18, 1954

DocketNos. 11899, 11900

StatusPublished

This text of 215 F.2d 678 (Clark Equipment Co. v. Weeks) 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

Clark Equipment Co. v. Weeks, 215 F.2d 678, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 426 (D.C. Cir. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The District Court sustained appellees in refusing to register, as alleged trademarks for appellant’s fork lift trucks, the terms Trucloader and Carloader. The court found that these are generic names of the goods and have not become distinctive of appellant’s goods. We see no reason to disturb these findings. We need not consider whether these “generic names” might some day become distinctive of appellant’s goods and whether, if they did, they would be entitled to registration. During the argument of these appeals it was suggested that “Clark’s Trucloader” and “Clark’s Carloader” might be entitled to registration, but that question is not before us.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The District Court sustained appellees in refusing to register, as alleged trademarks for appellant’s fork lift trucks, the terms Trucloader and Carloader. The court found that these are generic names of the goods and have not become distinctive of appellant’s goods. We see no reason to disturb these findings. We need not consider whether these “generic names” might some day become distinctive of appellant’s goods and whether, if they did, they would be entitled to registration. During the argument of these appeals it was suggested that “Clark’s Trucloader” and “Clark’s Carloader” might be entitled to registration, but that question is not before us.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 F.2d 678, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-equipment-co-v-weeks-cadc-1954.