Case ID: f_259/html/0990-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ROBB, Associate Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re SWAN & FINCH CO.
    (Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
    Submitted May 19, 1919.
    Decided June 2, 1919.)
    No. 1225, Patent Appeals.
    Tbade-Mabks and Tbade-Nahes <S=»3(4) — Registbation—“Textul” as Name fob Cleaning Oil.
    “Textul” as a trade-marlc for an oil to clean wool and worsteds is not registerable, because descriptive, since it is a misspelling of tbe word ■ “textile,” and a cleaning oil for textiles might properly be designated as “textile oil.”
    cgc^For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
    Appeal from the Commissioner of Patents.
    Application by the Swan & Finch Company to register a trade-mark. From a decision by the Commissioner of Patents denying registration, the applicant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Perry B. Turpin, of Washington, D. C., and J. K. Brachvogel, of New York City,, for appellant.
    Theodore A. Hostetler, of Washington, D. C., for Commissioner of Patents.
   ROBB, Associate Justice.

Appeal from a decision of the Patent Office refusing to register the word “Textul” as a trade-mark “for an oil to clean wool and worsteds,”, on the ground that it is descriptive of character or quality, within the meaning of the Trade-Mark Act (Act Feb. 20, 1905, c. 592, 33 Stat. 724 [Comp. St. §§ 9485, 9487-9511,9513-9516]):

We agree with the Patent Office that “Textul” is a misspelling of the word “textile,” and, since an oil for cleaning textiles, such as those covered by this application, might properly be designated as “textile oil,” that “Textul” is not registerable.

The decision is affirmed.

Affirmed.