Professional Documents
Culture Documents
VOL. 16, MARCH 31, 1966 495: Etepha vs. Director of Patents, Et Al
VOL. 16, MARCH 31, 1966 495: Etepha vs. Director of Patents, Et Al
496
497
SANCHEZ, J.:
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016bb0bfd5f0588cec29003600fb002c009e/p/AUB405/?username=Guest 3/9
7/2/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
_________________
498
7
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016bb0bfd5f0588cec29003600fb002c009e/p/AUB405/?username=Guest 4/9
7/2/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
7
practically 8 a monopoly” of the word “tussin” in a
trademark.
________________
499
________________
500
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016bb0bfd5f0588cec29003600fb002c009e/p/AUB405/?username=Guest 6/9
7/2/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
________________
13 Mead Johnson & Co. vs. N.V.J. Van Dorp, Ltd., et al., G.R. No. L-
17501, April 27, 1963. In this case, this Court held that the trademark
ALASKA does not infringe the registered trademark ALACTA. This
Court, after comparing the sizes of the containers and the color pattern,
was impressed more by the dissimilarities (in the labels attached to the
containers) than by the similarities appearing thereon. The present case,
we believe, is within the coverage of the Mead Johnson decision.
14 Lekas & Drivas, Inc. vs. Tenth Avenue Trading Corp., 223 F(2d), pp.
294, 296; italics supplied.
501
________________
15 The Upjohn Co. vs. Schwartz, etc., 246 F (2d), pp. 254, 262.
16 87 Corpus Juris Secundum, p. 295.
502
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016bb0bfd5f0588cec29003600fb002c009e/p/AUB405/?username=Guest 8/9
7/2/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 016
Decision affirmed.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016bb0bfd5f0588cec29003600fb002c009e/p/AUB405/?username=Guest 9/9