stating factors to be considered
Summary of this case from L.A. GEAR, INC. v. THOM McAN SHOE CONo. 116.
October 9, 1961, OCTOBER TERM, 1961.
Donald L. Brown, Isaac M. Barnett and Tracy R. V. Fike for petitioner.
Morris Relson for respondent.
C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 287 F. 2d 492.
stating factors to be considered
Summary of this case from L.A. GEAR, INC. v. THOM McAN SHOE COdeveloping test to determine whether consumers are likely to be confused by junior mark
Summary of this case from Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. Utah Division of Travel Developmentoutlining factors to be considered in determining if confusion in market exists
Summary of this case from Demetriades v. Kaufmannlisting factors to be considered in determining whether there is a trademark infringment
Summary of this case from Bertolli USA, Inc. v. Filippo Bertolli Fine Foods, Ltd.Full title:POLAROID CORP. v. POLARAD ELECTRONICS CORP
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 9, 1961
Incontestability has no effect on the availability of laches as a defense. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad…
Omm Art Creations Ltd. v. Simcha International, Inc.Even though the plaintiff has established secondary meaning as to the source and is not defeated by the…