Old Dutch Foods, Inc. v. Dan Dee Pretzel & Potato Chip Co.’s Empirical Analysis
477 F.2d 150 · 1973
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently November 2012 · most notably Blue Bell, Inc. v. Farah Manufacturing Co. (1975), Wrist-Rocket Manufacturing Co. v. Saunders Archery Co. (1978)
26 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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. § 1051 (§ 1 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1052 (§ 2 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1054 (§ 4 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1071 (§ 21 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1072 (§ 22 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (§ 32 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1115 (§ 33 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1127 (§ 45 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))
Relies on Hanover Star Milling Co. v. Metcalf · United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co. · Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing Co. v. S. S. Kresge Co. · Dawn Donut Co. v. Hart's Food Stores, Inc. · Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Company
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“when the Commissioner determines that confusion, mistake, or deception is not likely to result from the continued use by more than one person of the same or similar marks under conditions and limitations as to the . . . place of use of the marks . .. . concurrent registrations may be issued to such persons when they have become entitled to use such marks as a result of their concurrent lawful use in commerce prior to (i) the earliest of the filing dates of the applications pending or of any registration issued under this chapter”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“either a mixed finding of fact and conclusion of law, or it is a finding of an ultimate fact in the making of which is involved legal principles”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the fact that a product bears more than one mark does not mean that each cannot be a valid trademark.”
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.