Court Opinion

ID: 9637233
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:00:56.013607+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:57.732032
License: Public Domain

GARRETT, Presiding Judge
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent from the conclusion reached by my associates in this case.
It seems to me that the presence of the word “Du Pont” as an integral and presumably valid part of appellee’s mark so clearly states the origin of appellee’s goods that there is not the slightest likelihood of the public being confused or purchasers deceived as to the origin of appellant’s merchandise by the application thereto of the notation “Clarifoil” as a trade-mark, notwithstanding its partial resemblance to the word “Clar-apel.”