In re American Sugar Refining Co.

D.C. Circuit

In re American Sugar Refining Co.

47 App. D.C. 375, 1918 U.S. App. LEXIS 2423

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedFebruary 4, 1918

DocketNo. 1128

StatusPublished

This text of 47 App. D.C. 375 (In re American Sugar Refining Co.) 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

In re American Sugar Refining Co., 47 App. D.C. 375, 1918 U.S. App. LEXIS 2423 (D.C. Cir. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Robb

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Appeal from a decision of the Patent Office denying registration of the word “Kanelasscs” as a trademark for food syrup.

The syrup to which this mark is applied is made from sugar cane. • We think the test is whether the words, “cane molasses,” would be registerable. Obviously they would not, for these words would aptly describe applicant’s product, which is cane molasses or cane syrup. We have1, repeatedly said that the law prohibiting such registrations could not be avoided by merely resorting to phonetic spelling. The mark “Kanelasscs” conveys, and obviously was intended to convey, to the purchasing public definite information as to the character of the product sold under it. Certainly any producer of cane molasses would be entitled to sell it under that name.

It follows, therefore, that the Patent Office properly refused registration to this applicant. The decision is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Robb

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Appeal from a decision of the Patent Office denying registration of the word “Kanelasscs” as a trademark for food syrup.

The syrup to which this mark is applied is made from sugar cane. • We think the test is whether the words, “cane molasses,” would be registerable. Obviously they would not, for these words would aptly describe applicant’s product, which is cane molasses or cane syrup. We have1, repeatedly said that the law prohibiting such registrations could not be avoided by merely resorting to phonetic spelling. The mark “Kanelasscs” conveys, and obviously was intended to convey, to the purchasing public definite information as to the character of the product sold under it. Certainly any producer of cane molasses would be entitled to sell it under that name.

It follows, therefore, that the Patent Office properly refused registration to this applicant. The decision is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 App. D.C. 375, 1918 U.S. App. LEXIS 2423, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-american-sugar-refining-co-cadc-1918.