Benton Announcements v. Federal Trade Commission, 195.
| Decision Date | 06 July 1942 |
| Docket Number | No. 195.,195. |
| Citation | 130 F.2d 254 |
| Parties | BENTON ANNOUNCEMENTS, Inc., v. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Carlton A. Fisher, of Buffalo, N. Y., and John A. Bresnahan, of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
James T. Welch, W. T. Kelley, Chief Counsel, Federal Trade Commission, Martin A. Morrison, Asst. Chief Counsel, Merle P. Lyon, and James W. Nichol, Sp. Attys., all of Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before L. HAND, AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
This is a petition to review an order of the Federal Trade Commission which directed the petitioner to "cease and desist" from using the words "engraved," "engraving," or "engravers" to describe their stationery or the process by which they make it. That process is to engrave a metal plate in the usual way, but not to ink it; next to print the text or design upon the paper with ordinary type; finally to press the printed paper upon the surface of the plate hard enough to "bump up," or emboss, it where it touches the engraved text or design on the plate. To do this obviously requires absolutely perfect registry of the printing with the engraved design, and this the petitioner secures by a method not generally known. The process is much cheaper than ordinary engraving, which the Commission described in the following finding. . So far there is no dispute; the critical finding was as follows: "The words `engraving' and `engraved,' when used in connection with * * * business and social stationery, mean * * * that the stationery products * * * described contain * * * designs which * * * are the result of the application, under pressure, of metal plates which have been specially engraved * * * and are used in the production of such stationery by the process more particularly described in the foregoing paragraph."
As to this finding...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Charles of the Ritz Dist. Corp. v. Federal Trade Com'n
...is a qualified source of information "as to the buyers' understanding of the words they hear and use." Benton Announcements v. Federal Trade Commission, 2 Cir., 130 F.2d 254, 255; Stanley Laboratories, Inc., v. Federal Trade Commission, supra, 138 F.2d at page Petitioner contends finally th......
-
Standard Brands v. Smidler
...have been said to be entitled to judicial protection, at least in the Federal Trade Commission cases. See Benton Announcements, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission, 2 Cir., 130 F.2d 254; Federal Trade Commission v. Algoma Lumber Co., 291 U.S. 67, 78, 54 S.Ct. 315, 78 L.Ed. It is perhaps not in......
-
Ives Laboratories, Inc. v. Darby Drug Co., Inc., 78 C 372.
...customers into believing that the goods come from another, the courts protect customers in their choices. Benton Announcements, Inc. v. F.T.C., 130 F.2d 254, 255 (2d Cir. 1942). In each instance the determination to allow the exclusive use of a symbol requires a balancing of the interest in......
-
Blau v. Oppenheim
...L.Ed.2d 1129 (1957). Cf. United States v. Lennox Metal Mfg. Co., 225 F.2d 302, 310-313 (2d Cir. 1955); Benton Announcements, Inc. v. Federal Trade Comm'n, 130 F.2d 254, 255 (2d Cir. 1942). See generally, Frankfurter, Some Reflections on the Reading of Statutes, 47 Colum.L.Rev. 527 ...