Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1927

Three in One Oil Co. v. Boston Brass Co.

Three in One Oil Co. v. Boston Brass Co.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided December 5, 1927 · Orsdel
23 F.2d 895; 57 App. D.C. 358; 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 3245 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

J. L. Steuart, of New York City, for appellant., G-. P. Dike, of Boston, Mass., and A. V. Cushman, of Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Three in One Oil Co. v. Boston Brass Co.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

Appellant, Three in One Oil Company, opposed the registration of the trade-mark “3 in 1” by appellee, Boston Brass Company, which alleges use of the trade-mark on boiler relief valves, while appellant has for many years been manufacturing and selling oil under its registered trade-mark “3 in 1.”

It is clear that no confusion can arise from the use of the marks on the respective goods to which the mark is applied. It is insisted, however, that appellee company is appropriating the corporate name of the Oil Company. It is unnecessary to discuss this proposition, in view of our decision this day delivered in Three in One Oil Co. v. Lobl Manufacturing Co., 57 App. D. C. -, 23 F.(2d) 893.

The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.