SPICE ISLANDS COMPANY v. Spice Land Products, 76
| Decision Date | 08 January 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 76,Docket 25226.,76 |
| Citation | 262 F.2d 356 |
| Parties | SPICE ISLANDS COMPANY, a corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SPICE LAND PRODUCTS, Inc., a corporation, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
William G. MacKay, San Francisco, Cal. (Mock & Blum, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellee.
Kermit Gitenstein, Brooklyn, N. Y., for defendant-appellant.
Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and HINCKS and LUMBARD, Circuit Judges.
Our review of the district court's judgment presents the question of whether defendant's use of the mark "Spice Land" on its spice products infringes the plaintiff's registered mark "Spice Islands" for similar products. We agree with Judge Abruzzo that the defendant has infringed the plaintiff's valid mark, and we affirm the judgment enjoining the defendant from the use of "Spice Land" as a trademark or designation in connection with packing, processing, advertising, distributing or marketing of spices or related products.
We find no merit in the defendant's contention that the plaintiff's mark is a mere description, geographical or otherwise, and therefore unregistrable. 15 U.S.C.A. § 1052(e). To the contrary, the mark is sufficiently fanciful to sustain the relief accorded. However, since there is also ample support in the record for Judge Abruzzo's finding that the plaintiff's mark had "by reason of extensive advertising and use" attained a secondary meaning sufficient to entitle it to protection, we place our affirmance on that alternative ground as well.
Finally it is self-evident that when compared with "Spice Islands" the use of "Spice Land" as a trademark for spices and similar products is "likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive purchasers as to the source of origin of the goods or services." 15 U.S.C.A. § 1114(1). The word combinations are strikingly similar in sound and meaning. Maternally Yours, Inc. v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc., 2 Cir., 1956, 234 F.2d 538, 542; Douglas Laboratories Corp. v. Copper Tan, Inc., 2 Cir., 1954, 210 F.2d 453, certiorari denied 1954, 347 U.S. 968, 74 S.Ct. 779, 98 L.Ed. 1109.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
WE Bassett Company v. Revlon, Inc.
...(or unconsciousness) of consumers. Cf. Miss Universe, Inc. v. Patricelli, supra, 408 F.2d at 509; Spice Islands Co. v. Spice Land Prods. Inc., 262 F.2d 356, 357 (2d Cir. 1959); Maternally Yours, Inc. v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc., supra, 234 F.2d at 544; Beef/Eater Restaurants, Inc. v. James......
-
Continental Connector v. Continental Specialties
...v. Dick Littrell's New World Carpets, 438 F.2d 482, 485-87 (5th Cir. 1971) ("world" not geographic term); Spice Islands Co. v. Spice Land Products, Inc., 262 F.2d 356 (2d Cir. 1959) ("Spice Islands" not geographic term); Atlantic Monthly Co. v. Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 197 F.Supp. 52......
-
ITS Industria Tessuti Speciali v. Aerfab Corp.
...228 F.2d 254, 43 CCPA 740 (1955) (Town Moor and Townley); CASES WHERE INFRINGEMENT FOUND: Spice Islands Co. v. Spice Land Products, Inc., 262 F.2d 356 (2d Cir. 1959) (Spice Land and Spice Islands); Northam Warren Corp. v. Universal Cosmetic Co., 18 F.2d 774 (7th Cir. 1927) (Cuticlean and Ge......
-
Forschner Group, Inc. v. Arrow Trading Co. Inc.
...& Co., 240 U.S. 251, 256, 36 S.Ct. 269, 270, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916) (AMERICAN GIRL not a geographic term); Spice Islands Co. v. Spice Land Products, Inc., 262 F.2d 356, 356-57 (2d Cir.1959) (SPICE ISLANDS not a geographic term); National Lead Co. v. Wolfe, 223 F.2d 195, 200 (9th Cir.) (DUTCH a......