Long John Distilleries, Ltd., D.B.A. Long John Distilleries v. Sazerac Company, Inc., D.B.A. John Handy Company
LONG JOHN DISTILLERIES, LTD., D.B.A. Long John Distilleries, Appellant, v. SAZERAC COMPANY, Inc., D.B.A. John Handy Company, Appellee
Opinion
FISHER, Judge.
The sole issue in this opposition proceeding is whether the mark “FRIAR JOHN,” when applied to brandy, would likely result in confusion, mistake or deception to the public because of similarity to the registered 1
mark “LONG JOHN,” owned and used by appellantopposer in labeling its product, scotch whiskey. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board dismissed the notice of opposition with opinion.
2
The board found that the third party registrations of record are themselves sufficient to establish that the word “John” has been so frequently used as a part of distilled beverage marks that it is incapable of indicating origin in any one source and that the substantial good will in the mark “LONG JOHN” acquired by appellant over years of use and promotion resides in the unitary mark. Further, the board was of opinion that, considered in their entireties, the differences in sound, appearance and commercial impression of the two marks are obvious and one is in no way suggestive of the other.
We agree with, approve and adopt the opinion of the board, and its decision is affirmed.
Affirmed.
1
. Reg. No. 577,305 issued July 14, 1953 and Reg.No.765,225, issued Feb. 18, 1964.
2
. Abstracted at 156 USPQ 713 .
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(holding “Long John” and “Friar John” not substantially similar because the marks communicate very different ideas)
-
(long use of unitary mark LONG JOHN did not prove that JOHN by itself indicated origin, especially where many others in the field of distilled beverages used JOHN)
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.