J. B. Williams Co. v. Beard

Customs and Patent Appeals

J. B. Williams Co. v. Beard

474 F.2d 1330, 176 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 534, 1973 CCPA LEXIS 420

CourtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals

DecidedFebruary 22, 1973

DocketPatent Appeal No. 8893

StatusPublished

This text of 474 F.2d 1330 (J. B. Williams Co. v. Beard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Customs and Patent Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. B. Williams Co. v. Beard, 474 F.2d 1330, 176 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 534, 1973 CCPA LEXIS 420 (ccpa 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, result reported at 167 USPQ 372 (1970), dismissing an opposition lodged by appellant. The board opinion, including footnotes, reads, in full:

An application [(Serial No. 301,-798)] has been filed [(June 24, 1968)] to register “FIRON” for medicinal tablets containing ferrous fumarate, use since January 30, 1959 being asserted.

Registration has been opposed by The J. B. Williams Company, Inc., registrant of “FUMIRON” for [an] ethically sold medicinal for the treatment of iron deficiency anemia.¹

Neither party has taken testimony.

While the goods of the parties are obviously closely related medical products for treating iron deficiencies, it is our considered opinion that “FI-RON” does not so closely resemble “FUMIRON” in sound, appearance or significance as to lead to a likelihood of confusion.²

Upon careful consideration of the record before us and the briefs and arguments of counsel, we find ourselves in agreement with the conclusions expressed by the board. The decision below is, accordingly, affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, result reported at 167 USPQ 372 (1970), dismissing an opposition lodged by appellant. The board opinion, including footnotes, reads, in full:

An application [(Serial No. 301,-798)] has been filed [(June 24, 1968)] to register “FIRON” for medicinal tablets containing ferrous fumarate, use since January 30, 1959 being asserted.

Registration has been opposed by The J. B. Williams Company, Inc., registrant of “FUMIRON” for [an] ethically sold medicinal for the treatment of iron deficiency anemia.¹

Neither party has taken testimony.

While the goods of the parties are obviously closely related medical products for treating iron deficiencies, it is our considered opinion that “FI-RON” does not so closely resemble “FUMIRON” in sound, appearance or significance as to lead to a likelihood of confusion.²

Upon careful consideration of the record before us and the briefs and arguments of counsel, we find ourselves in agreement with the conclusions expressed by the board. The decision below is, accordingly, affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

474 F.2d 1330, 176 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 534, 1973 CCPA LEXIS 420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-b-williams-co-v-beard-ccpa-1973.