Court Opinion

ID: 9446792
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 22:18:33.955264+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:47.112485
License: Public Domain

WORLEY, Judge
(concurring).
I agree with the result reached by the majority, but do so without regard to third party registrations or evidence of their use. My reasons for excluding consideration of marks of those not actual parties to .opposition and cancellation proceedings are set forth in a concurring opinion in Shoe Corporation of America v. Juvenile Shoe Corporation of America, 46 CCPA -, 266 F.2d 797. There it was suggested that once the door was opened to consideration of third party marks for one purpose, it would become necessary to consider them for many purposes. In that case only registration was considered. Here, however, the new doctrine is expanded to include use as well as registration. What the next step might be is a matter of conjecture.
Consideration of this new element will place additional and unnecessary burdens on the litigants, the Patent Office, and the courts. I am opposed to such a course primarily because it is a complete reversal of our prior decisions, and also because the real evidentiary worth of third party registrations is, at best, so questionable as to constitute a very real danger to the proper determination of the rights of those immediately involved.
I trust that our experience in the Shoe Corporation case and here will convince us of the desirability of an early return to our established precedents.