Case Name: CARON CORPORATION v. HENRI MURAOUR & CIE.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1926-06-01
Citations: 13 F.2d 318
Docket Number: No. 1850
Parties: CARON CORPORATION v. HENRI MURAOUR & CIE.
Judges: Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, ROBB, Associate Justice, and BAILEY, Justice of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 13
Pages: 318–318

Head Matter:
CARON CORPORATION v. HENRI MURAOUR & CIE.
(Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
Submitted May 11, 1926.
Decided June 1, 1926.)
No. 1850.
Donald U. Rich, of Washington, D. C., for appellant.
E. T. Fenwick and W. E. Lamb, both of Washington, D. C., for appellee.
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, ROBB, Associate Justice, and BAILEY, Justice of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.

Opinion:
ROBB, Associate Justice.
Appeal from concurrent decisions of the tribunals of the Patent Office dismissing appellant's opposition to the registration by appellee of the trade-mark "Narcisse Bleu," for use on perfumery products; the basis of the application being a registration in France.
The opposer relied upon prior trade-mark use on the same class of goods of the mark "Le Narcisse Noir." The Patent Office ruled that "Narcisse," being the French word for narcissus, necessarily is descriptive as applied to perfumes.; We concur in this view. See Le Blume Import Co. v. Coty (C. C. A.) 293 F. 344. Opposer, by selecting such descriptive term, assumed the risk that others might also use it, provided their use was not deceptively similar to that of opposer. We agree with the Patent Office that, inasmuch as each party has the right to use "Narcisse," "Narcisse Bleu" and "Narcisse Noir" are not deceptively similar. The' decision therefore is affirmed.
Affirmed.