VON PATZOLL

v.

UNITED STATES; BRANDON V. UNITED STATES; FEEZELL V. UNITED STATES; AND EVANS V. UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

• Inwood Labs., Inc. v. Ives Labs., Inc., 456 U.S. 844 (U.S. 1982)
  …ming trial on the merits, the appellate court defined the elements of a claim based upon § 32 in some detail. Relying primarily upon Coca-Cola Co. v. Snow Crest Beverages, Inc., 64 F. Supp. 980 (Mass. 1946), aff’d, 162 F. 2d 280 (CA1), cert. denied, 332 U. S. 809 (1947), the court stated that the petitioners would be liable under § 32 either if they suggested, even by implication, that retailers fill bottles with generic cyclandelate and label the bottle with Ives’ trademark or if [*852] the petitioners cont…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Provenzano, 334 F.2d 678 (3d Cir. 1964)
  …offense, the proof must establish that the crime in question was committed by someone and that the person charged as an aider and abettor, aided and abetted in its commission. Von Patzoll v. United States, 163 F. 2d 216 (10 Cir.), certiorari denied, 332 U.S. 809, 68 S.Ct. 110, 92 L.Ed. 386 (1947). It is not prerequisite to the conviction of the aider and abettor that the principal be tried and convicted or in fact even be identified. See Gray v. United States, 260 F. 2d 483 (D.C.Cir. 1958). Each participant…
• Application of E. I. DuPONT DeNEMOURS & Co. (Assignee of Horizon Indus. Corporation), 476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)
  …tances surrounding use of the mark. The Decisional Process The ultimate question of the likelihood of consumer confusion has been termed a question of fact. Coca-Cola Company v. Snow Crest Beverages, Inc., 162 F. 2d 280 (1st Cir. 1947), cert. den. 332 U.S. 809, 68 S.Ct. 110, 92 L.Ed. 386 (1947). If labeled a mixed question or one of law, it is necessarily drawn from the probative facts in evidence. As so often . said, each case must be decided on its own facts. There is no litmus rule which can provide a…