PHILCO CORPORATION

v.

F. & B. MANUFACTURING CO.

Citator

Cited By

• Union Carbide Corp. v. Ever-Ready Inc., 531 F.2d 366 (7th Cir. 1976)
  …inctive mark or name will be more broadly protected than words, such as “ever ready,” which have been registered and applied to a variety of products. Philco Corporation v. F. & B. Manufacturing Co., 170 F. 2d 958, 961 (7th Cir. 1948), cert. denied, 336 U.S. 945, 69 S.Ct. 813, 93 L.Ed. 1102 (1949). The district court found that the parties’ marks were dissimilar. The conclusion was based “on the whole appearance” of the marks, and we would agree that when the marks are placed side-by-side differences are r…
• Fuller Prods. Co. v. The Fuller Brush Co., 299 F.2d 772 (7th Cir. 1962)
  …same descriptive properties as the goods with which the mark has become identified by such prior use. Borg-Warner Corp. v. York-Shipley Inc., 7 Cir., 1961, 293 F. 2d 88; Philco Corp. v. F. & B. Mfg. Co., 7 Cir., 1948, 170 F. 2d 958, 961, cert. den. 336 U.S. 945, 69 S.Ct. 813, 93 L.Ed. 1102. [*776] The Fuller Brush Company argues that plaintiff did not establish that its mark acquired a secondary meaning indicating plaintiff as the source of its vitamin products, and that the District Court made no finding…
• Sunbeam Furniture Corp. v. Sunbeam Corp., 191 F.2d 141 (9th Cir. 1951)
  …been applied to and used and’registered as trademarks for a large number and variety of products by numerous manufacturers, ordinarily will be narrowly protected. Philco Corp. v. F. & B. Mfg. Co., 7 Cir., 1948, 170 F. 2d 958, 961, certiorari denied, 336 U.S. 945, 69 S.Ct. 813, 93 L.Ed. 1102. The change wrought by the 1946 Trademark Act on Title 15 U.S.C.A. § 1114(1), Act of July 5, 1946, c, 540, Title VI, § 32, 60.Stat. 437, does not “stifle all excursions into -adjacent markets * * S. C. Johnson & Son v. J…