Reports of Patent, Design, and Trade Mark Cases, Volume 36Published at the Patent Office Sales Branch, 1919 - Design protection |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 16
Page 6
... Y - TO WITH A DEVICE VICTORY AND A LAUREL Abrasive materials Weighing machines .. PAGE 153 89 Commercial motor vehicles 1 , 139 Loose - leaf ledgers 6 Soap 296 Edge tools 175 WREATH . WESTBROOK , AND PULLMAN .. Skins and hides 240 ...
... Y - TO WITH A DEVICE VICTORY AND A LAUREL Abrasive materials Weighing machines .. PAGE 153 89 Commercial motor vehicles 1 , 139 Loose - leaf ledgers 6 Soap 296 Edge tools 175 WREATH . WESTBROOK , AND PULLMAN .. Skins and hides 240 ...
Page 13
... TO . National Cash Register Company's 34 R.P.C. 273 , 354 Patent Type Foundry Company . 2 L.T. ( N.S. ) 359 Registrar of Trade Marks y . W. & 30 R.P.C. 660 ; L.R. ( 1913 ) A.C. THE ILLUSTRATED OFFICIAL JOURNAL ( PATENTS ) . [ Dec. 13 N ...
... TO . National Cash Register Company's 34 R.P.C. 273 , 354 Patent Type Foundry Company . 2 L.T. ( N.S. ) 359 Registrar of Trade Marks y . W. & 30 R.P.C. 660 ; L.R. ( 1913 ) A.C. THE ILLUSTRATED OFFICIAL JOURNAL ( PATENTS ) . [ Dec. 13 N ...
Page 34
... to costs . HENRY ROSSELL & Co. LD . v . HODGES , p . 175 . 2. " Rito " held not to be an infringement of the Trade Mark " Lito , " or of a Trade Mark consisting of the word " Y - TO " and a device . FITCHETTS LD . v . LOUBET & Co. LD ...
... to costs . HENRY ROSSELL & Co. LD . v . HODGES , p . 175 . 2. " Rito " held not to be an infringement of the Trade Mark " Lito , " or of a Trade Mark consisting of the word " Y - TO " and a device . FITCHETTS LD . v . LOUBET & Co. LD ...
Page 81
... to the date of registration :-( A ) By the deposit in the Patent Office ... Y FIG . 2 . THE FIC.4 . " NIMROD " THE " GOLIGHTLY " Woodhead The Defendants ... to the issue of the writ , sold in this 82 THE ILLUSTRATED OFFICIAL JOURNAL ...
... to the date of registration :-( A ) By the deposit in the Patent Office ... Y FIG . 2 . THE FIC.4 . " NIMROD " THE " GOLIGHTLY " Woodhead The Defendants ... to the issue of the writ , sold in this 82 THE ILLUSTRATED OFFICIAL JOURNAL ...
Page 231
... to Particulars of Objections . - Appeal to Court of Appeal.- Leave to adduce further evidence refused . - Appeal ... Y 66 66 232 THE ILLUSTRATED OFFICIAL JOURNAL ( PATENTS ) Supplement . ]
... to Particulars of Objections . - Appeal to Court of Appeal.- Leave to adduce further evidence refused . - Appeal ... Y 66 66 232 THE ILLUSTRATED OFFICIAL JOURNAL ( PATENTS ) Supplement . ]
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
action Aktiengesellschaft alleged invention aluminium Alundum amendment Applicants Avery Board of Trade British British Thomson-Houston Company Burford Company of Western Complete Specification cyanogen bromide Defendants described DESIGN device distinctive evidence extraction fact Fleming valve front wheels Gold Ore Treat Gold Ore Treatment Golden Horseshoe Estates granted Gray K.C. guard ILLUSTRATED OFFICIAL JOURNAL infringement injunction Interrogatories invalid judgment Letters Patent Liquidation London General Omnibus Lords machine Mann manufacture Marconi Company MARK CASES Vol matter milk motor vehicles OFFICIAL JOURNAL PATENTS paragraph Particulars of Breaches Particulars of Objections Patent Agents Petition Petitioners Plaintiff Company potassium cyanide Power Flexible Tubing prior user Pullman question rear wheels referred registered Registrar of Trade remuneration REPORTS OF PATENT Rito Shoe sold solution solvent Statement of Claim stitch-down boots subject-matter substantially Sulman surname TRADE MARK tramcar Treatment Company tungsten upper valve Western Australia Ld word XXXVI Y-TO zinc
Popular passages
Page 263 - provided that no amendment shall be allowed that would make the Specification as amended claim an invention substantially larger than, or substantially different from, the invention claimed by the Specification as it stood before the amendment. On the construction of this Section two things are clear, first, that the allowance or
Page 146 - served to distinguish the goods of the proprietor of the Trade Mark from those of other persons, and it was desired to extend the advantage gained by registration to those surnames which the Court might consider " distinctive marks," on a review of all the circumstances of the case.
Page 263 - because, in his opinion, the proposed amendment makes the Specification as amended claim an invention substantially different from the invention claimed by the Specification as it stood before the amendment, and, secondly, because in the exercise of his discretion he did not think fit to allow it.
Page 147 - any other distinctive mark," that is " a mark adapted to distinguish the goods " of the proprietor of the Trade Mark from those of other persons." The Section further provides that any name, signature, or word or words, which does not fall
Page 264 - point." The question is whether the Specification after that amendment would claim an invention substantially different from the invention claimed by the Specification as it stood before the amendment. The proposed amendment is carefully drawn so as to be in form by way of disclaimer. In my opinion, however, the real effect of it is to import into the Specification for the first time the element
Page 206 - infringement of which complaint is made." Then Rule 21 provides that : " At ' the hearing of any action, petition, or counterclaim relating to a Patent no ' evidence shall, except by leave of the Court, .... be admitted in proof of ' any alleged infringement. . . not raised in the Particulars of Breaches." The Plaintiffs by paragraph 2 of their Particulars of Breaches do give
Page 263 - disallowance of an amendment is in the discretion of the Court, and, secondly, that no amendment, even if it be in form by way of disclaimer, is to be allowed if it would make the Specification as amended claim an invention substantially different from the invention claimed by the Specification as it stood before the amendment. The
Page 263 - amended claim an invention substantially different from the invention claimed by the Specification as it stood before the amendment. The learned Judge has refused to allow the amendment, first,
Page 263 - subject to such terms as to costs or otherwise as the Court may think fit, provided that no amendment shall be allowed that would make the Specification as amended claim an invention substantially
Page 172 - himself in relation to the matters to be investigated as to create in the mind of a reasonable man a suspicion that he may have such a bias. Applying that principle to the facts of this case, it is in my opinion impossible to deny that the conduct of the Council in preferring and supporting the charges