green
Positive treatment
3.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1963 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1963
1994
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Gladys City Co. v. Amoco Production Co.
See Mound Company v. Texas Company, 298 F.2d 905, 908 (5th Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 29 , 9 L.Ed.2d 57 (1962); McMahon v. Christmann, 157 Tex. 403 , 303 S.W.2d 341, 344 (1957).
cited
Cited "see"
Lottie Joplin Thomas Trust v. Crown Publishers, Inc.
Accord, Orgel v. Clark Boardman Co., 301 F.2d 119, 121 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962); Neal v. Thomas Organ Co., 241 F.Supp. 1020, 1022 (S.D.Cal.1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Meredith Corporation v. Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.
See to identical effect Orgel v. Clark Boardman Co., 301 F.2d 119 (2nd Cir.), cert. den., 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc. And John Keats
See Gorman, Copyright Protection for the Collection and Representation of Facts, 76 Harv.L.Rev. 1569, 1584 (1963) (criticizing Toksvig v. Bruce Publishing Co., supra). 26 Our decision in Orgel v. Clark Boardman Co., 301 F.2d 119 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962), does not require a contrary result.
examined
Cited "see"
Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
DuPont de Nemours & Co., 240 F.Supp. 612, 617 (S.D.N.Y.1965); see Orgel v. Clark Boardman Co., 301 F.2d 119, 120 (2 Cir.), cert. den., 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962).
cited
Cited "see"
Freeman v. Fidelity-Philadelphia Trust Company
See Goldberg v. Battles, 196 F.Supp. 749, 752-753 (E.D.Pa.1961), aff’d on opinion below, 299 F.2d 937 (C.A.3, 1962), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 32 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962).
discussed
Cited "see"
Life Music, Inc. v. Wonderland Music Company
See Orgel v. Clark Boardman Co., 301 F.2d 119 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962); National Comics Publications, Inc. v. Fawcett Publications, Inc., 191 F.2d 594, 603 (2d Cir. 1951), modified on other grounds, 198 F.2d 927 (2d Cir. 1952; Universal Pictures Co. v. Harold Lloyd Corp., 162 F.2d 354, 360-361 (9th Cir. 1947).
cited
Cited "see"
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc., and Henry Glass & Co. v. Jobela Fabrics, Inc.
See Orgel v. Clark Boardman Co., 301 F.2d 119, 112 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962) ; B & B Auto Supply, Inc. v. Plesser, 205 F.Supp. 36, 41 (S.D.N.Y.1962).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Maid to Perfection v. Hyman
At common law, the territorial extent of the use of a mark was "restricted to the locality where the mark [was] used and to the area of probable expansion." Spartan Food Sys., Inc. v. HFS Corp., 813 F.2d 1279, 1282 (4th Cir. 1987); see also Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Lakeland Grocery Corp., 301 F.2d 156, 161 (4th Cir.) ("It has been generally recognized . . . that an established trade name is entitled to protection not only in the area in which it already renders service or sells goods but also in areas to which its trade may reason- ably be expected to expand."), cert. denied , 371 U.S. 817 (1…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Maid to Perfection Corporation v. Michelle Hyman Maid to Perfection, Incorporated, Maid to Perfection Corporation v. Michelle Hyman Maid to Perfection, Incorporated
At common law, the territorial extent of the use of a mark was "restricted to the locality where the mark [was] used and to the area of probable expansion." Spartan Food Sys., Inc. v. HFS Corp., 813 F.2d 1279, 1282 (4th Cir.1987); see also Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Lakeland Grocery Corp., 301 F.2d 156, 161 (4th Cir.) ("It has been generally recognized ... that an established trade name is entitled to protection not only in the area in which it already renders service or sells goods but also in areas to which its trade may reasonably be expected to expand."), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 (1962).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon, Incorporated Max Shayne, Incorporated v. Alpha of Virginia, Incorporated, D/B/A Lone Star Grill
See Osem Food Industries Ltd. v. Sherwood Foods, Inc., 917 F.2d 161, 165 (4th Cir.1990); AMP Inc. v. Foy, 540 F.2d 1181, 1187 (4th Cir.1976); see also Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Lakeland Grocery Corp., 301 F.2d 156, 163 (4th Cir.1962), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Williams v. Crichton
Attorneys’ Fees in Copyright Actions The Copyright Act states that in its discretion a court may award costs “by or against any party” and “a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party.” 17 U.S.C. § 505 ; see also Orgel v. Clark Boardman Co., 301 F.2d 119, 122 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Perini Corp. v. Perini Construction, Inc.
Baltimore Bedding Corp. v. Moses, 182 Md. 229 , 34 A.2d 338, 343 (1943); see also Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Lakeland Grocery Corp., 301 F.2d 156, 161 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 817 , 83 S.Ct. 31 , 9 L.Ed.2d 58 (1962); Chayt v. Darling Retail Shops Corp., 175 F.Supp. 462, 468 (D.Md.1959).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Battles
v.
Goldberg, Secretary of Labor
v.
Goldberg, Secretary of Labor
No. 184.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 8, 1962.
Stanford Shmukler for petitioner., Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg and Theodore George Gilinsky for respondent.
Published
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.