Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
SOCIÉTÉ ANONYME DE LA DISTILLERIE DE LA LIQUEUR BENEDICTINE DE L'ABBAYE DE FECAMP v. PUZIELLO et al.
250 F. 928·United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York·1918
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
SOCIÉTÉ ANONYME DE LA DISTILLERIE DE LA LIQUEUR BENEDICTINE DE L’ABBAYE DE FECAMP v. PUZIELLO et al.
(District Court, E. D. New York.
May 16, 1918.)
Trade-Marks and Trade-Names <®=>16 — Subjects of Trade-Mark — Package or Container.
The shape and appearance of a package or container cannot he made the subject of a trade-mark.
In Equity. Suit by Société Anonyme de la Distillerie de la Liqueur Benedictine de L’Abbaye de Fecamp against Giovanni Puziello, Ra-faele Puziello, and Antonio Luccaro, copartners trading as Puziello, Luccaro & Co. Decree for complainant.
Gantz & Tucker, of New York City (George W. Tucker, Jr., of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.
S'ol L. Youngentob, of New York City,- for defendants.
[MAJORITY — CHATFIELD, District Judge.]
CHATFIELD, District Judge.
The charge of infringement of trade-mark No. 95,488 has not been made out, and the plaintiff does not sufficiently prove validity of trade-mark No. 60,241, which states that the design of the trade-mark is applied by putting the goods in a bottle of that design.
The statute of February 20, 1905, allowing the registration of a trade-mark in use for more than 10 years, does not alter the fundamental proposition, that a trade-mark is a design or mark rather than a container or package. Thaddeus Davids Co. v. Davids et al., 178 Fed. 801, 102 C. C. A. 249; Hughes v. Alfred H. Smith Co., 209 Fed. 37, 126 C. C. A. 179. Resemblance in package or wrapping would not constitute the infringement of a trade-mark. Philadelphia Novelty Mfg. Co. v. Rouss (C. C.) 40 Fed. 585.
Under the former trade-mark law, the shape and appearance of a package or wrapping could not be made the subject of a trade-mark, as distinguished from a design which of itself made up the mark. Fleischmann v. Starkey (C. C.) 25 Fed. 127; Adams v. Heisel (C. C.) 31 Fed. 279; Enoch Morgan’s Sons Co. v. Troxell, 89 N. Y. 292, 42 Am. Rep. 294; Pillsbury v. Pillsbury-Washburn Flour Mills Co., 64 Fed. 841, 12 C. C. A. 432; National Biscuit Co. v. Baker (C. C.) 95 Fed. 135; United States Tobacco Co. v. McGreenery (C. C.) 144 Fed. 531; Coca-Cola Co. v. Glee-No1 Bottling Co., 221 Fed. 61, 137 C. C. A. 83.
The plaintiff may have a decree on the ground of unfair competition.