Jewel Companies, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the Westhall Company, D/B/a Jewel Mart, Defendant-Appellee., 575 F.2d 1176 (6th Cir. 1978)

Federal Circuits, 6th Cir. (May 15, 1978)

Docket number: 76-1764


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/jewel-companies-westhall-mart-36884842
Id. vLex: VLEX-36884842

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - Hindu Incense, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. Charles Meadows and Dorothy Meadows, Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees., 692 F.2d 1048 (6th Cir. 1982)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - Ameritech, Inc., an Ohio Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. American Information Technologies Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, D/B/a Ameritech, Defendant-Appellee., 811 F.2d 960 (6th Cir. 1987)

Text:

James M. Porter, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Cleveland, Ohio, Robert M. Newbury, Pattishall, McAuliffe & Hofstetter, David C. Hilliard, Floyd A. Mandell, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff-appellant.

Marvin L. Karp, Ronald Isroff, Ulmer, Berne, Laronge, Glickman & Curtis, Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant-appellee.

Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, and EDWARDS and ENGEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff-Appellee Jewel Companies, Inc., filed this action for injunctive and compensatory relief against The Westhall Company, d/b/a Jewel Mart, alleging that defendant's use of the word "Jewel" in its Jewel Mart stores unfairly infringed upon appellant's "Jewel Home Shopping Service." District Judge Thomas D. Lambros entered judgment in favor of the defendant. Reference is made to the comprehensive opinion of the district court for a recitation of pertinent facts. Jewel Companies, Inc. v. The Westhall Co., 413 F.Supp. 994 (N.D.Ohio 1976).

Upon consideration of the briefs and oral arguments, and the entire record, the court concludes that the findings of fact of the district court are not clearly erroneous, Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a), and that no reversible error is disclosed by the record.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Other documents:
Natalya Guterman (2008) | Multimedia Available New Premium 5.1 Multimedia Speaker System from Logitech Unlocks the Power of Do... | RESOLUCION de 10 de enero de 2001 de la Secretaría General Técnica por la que se acuerda la pub... | Par ordonnance du 10 juin 2003, prononcee par M. le juge de paix du canton de Ciney-Rochefort, sieg... | Sentenza of T.A.R - Basilicata Potenza n 144 of March 17 2006 | canadian trademark owners concerned about new privacy measures for .ca domains | acórdão nº 60048 of segunda turma of october 22 1982 | Portaria N 988/2007 de 17 de Dezembro | Acórdão Nº 70013186879 of Tribunal de Justiça do RS - Décima Terceira Câmara Cível, of January... | Acórdão Nº 70024254591 of Tribunal de Justiça do RS - Décima Segunda Câmara Cível, of September 25, 2008 | sentenza of t.a.r - sicilia catania nº 620 of april 21 2006 | sanctions blocked persons specially-designated nationals terrorists narcotics traffickers...