Q-Tipps, Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
206 F.2d 144 · 1953
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 26 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 121 later decisions — most recently December 2000 · most notably Stix Products, Inc. v. United Merchants & Manufacturers, Inc. (1968), Harold F. Ritchie, Inc. v. Chesebrough-Pond's, Inc. (1960)
49 federal appellate · 26 district · 5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1115 (§ 33 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1121 (§ 39 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))
Relies on Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co. · Steele v. Bulova Watch Co. · Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing Co. v. S. S. Kresge Co. · Champion Spark Plug Co. v. Sanders · Jefferson & Clearfield Coal & Iron Co. v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is worth pointing out, at the-start of our discussion, that we are-in a field where the tendency of the-law ‘has been in the direction of enforcing increasingly higher standards of fairness or commercial morality in trade. The tendency still persists.’ Restatement, Torts, Volume III, page 540. In any situation where the law is in the growing stage it is not to be expected that-the advance in all courts will be simultaneous. Furthermore, when the-final outcome on a given set of facts may vary, not with the legal concepts involved, but their application to particular states of fact, the pattern is inevitably less clear than in cases where a definite rule is to be applied.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““A ‘trade-mark’ is any mark, word, letter, number, design, picture or combination thereof in any form of arrangement, which (a) is adopted and used by the person to denominate goods which he markets, and (b) is affixed to the goods, and (c) is not, except as stated in §§ 720-722, a common or generic name for the goods or a picture of them or a geographical, personal or corporate or other association name, or a designation descriptive of the goods or of their quality, ingredients, properties or functions, and (d) the use of which for the purpose stated in Clause (a) is prohibited neither by legislative enactment nor by an otherwise defined public policy.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The evidence shows a list of dozens of names suggested by various employees, many of which are arbitrary, fanciful and completely unlike anything suggested by the plaintiff's product. But in the end defendant's top management came up with the name under discussion, `Cotton Tips.' It is quite clear why, with all the possibilities open to it, defendant made this choice. * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.