1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 747 F.2d
  5. 747 F.2d 358 (1984)
 

INDUCT-O-MATIC CORP. v. INDUCTOTHERM CORP.

No. 83-1271.

747 F.2d 358 (1984)

INDUCT-O-MATIC CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INDUCTOTHERM CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Decided October 31, 1984.

Rehearing and Rehearing Denied December 18, 1984.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael R. Dinnin (argued), Harness, Dickey & Pierce, Birmingham, Mich., for plaintiff-appellant.

Arthur H. Seidel (argued), Seidel, Gonda, Goldhammer, P.C., Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant-appellee.

Before KENNEDY and WELLFORD, Circuit Judges, and RUBIN, District Judge.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied December 18, 1984.

WELLFORD, Circuit Judge.

In June 1978, Inductotherm, defendant-appellee, filed a trademark opposition proceeding in the United States Patent Office to protest the grant of a trademark registration to plaintiff-appellant for its mark "INDUCT-O-MATIC" (IOM). The Trademark Examiner, however, already had ruled in May 1978 that the mark "INDUCT-O-MATIC" was entitled to registration over Inductotherm's registered...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases