Schield v. Jones

D.C. Circuit

Schield v. Jones

12 F.2d 325, 56 App. D.C. 252, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3234

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedApril 5, 1926

DocketNo. 1843

StatusPublished

This text of 12 F.2d 325 (Schield v. Jones) 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

Schield v. Jones, 12 F.2d 325, 56 App. D.C. 252, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3234 (D.C. Cir. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from concurrent decisions of the tribunals of the Patent Office refusing, on the petition of appellant, to cancel the mark “Devilon,” for use on an insecticide; the mark of appellant being “Red Devil,” used on powdered lyes.

The Patent Office entertained doubt as to whether the marks were used on goods of the same descriptive properties, but, passing that question, we agree that the two marks are not deceptively similar.

The 'decision is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from concurrent decisions of the tribunals of the Patent Office refusing, on the petition of appellant, to cancel the mark “Devilon,” for use on an insecticide; the mark of appellant being “Red Devil,” used on powdered lyes.

The Patent Office entertained doubt as to whether the marks were used on goods of the same descriptive properties, but, passing that question, we agree that the two marks are not deceptively similar.

The 'decision is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 F.2d 325, 56 App. D.C. 252, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schield-v-jones-cadc-1926.