Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. National Steel Construction Co.’s Empirical Analysis
442 F.2d 1383 · 1971
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1052 (§ 2 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))
Relies on National Dryer Manufacturing Corporation and National Dryer Sales Corporation v. The National Drying MacHinery Company. National Dryer Manufacturing Corporation and National Dryer Sales Corporation v. The National Drying MacHinery Co., the National Drying MacHinery Company v. Jack Ackoff, Individually and Trading as Jack Ackoff Company · 129 F. Supp. 389 - National Drying & MacHinery Company v. Ackoff
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“, such rights are not so limited as to be nonexistent except for an identical use. As stated in Matsushita in finding likelihood of confusion between uses of NATIONAL in a cancellation proceeding: 38 Neither trademarks nor the public are adequately protected unless decisions in cases of this kind are based on a realistic appraisal of the likelihood of purchasers or prospective purchasers being confused as to source regardless of theoretical”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.