Court Opinion

ID: 9653835
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:56:36.78301+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:02.474649
License: Public Domain

BLAND, Associate Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the' conclusion reached, but I am not prepared to agree with the opinion of the majority wherein the words “Hex” and “Hexol” are discussed. For the purposes of the decision of this ease, it is not necessary to discuss the conflict between “Hex” and “Hexol,” since the court is of unanimous opinion that the word “Hexol” cannot be registered for the reason that confusion would result between goods sold under the trademark “Hexeide” and those sold under the trade-mark “Hexol.” “Hex” may be derived from the Greek word “Hexa,” and it may indicate or suggest an article or thing having six parts or which is in some manner concerned with the word “six,” but in the instant ease there is no. suggestion that appellee’s merchandise is in any sense described by the word “Hex.” I prefer to reserve the questions discussed with reference to the word “Hex” until a fuller consideration of the same is necessary.
In the opinion of the majority is also found the following: “The suffixes ‘ol’ and ‘ide’ are generally used in the formation of chemical terms.” If the quoted sentence is given the effeet which I think is intended, the same objection to the registration of both words “Hexol” and “Hexeide” would maintain as is here suggested-with reference to the word “Hex.”