About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

40 Trademark Rep. 326 (1950)
Haughton Elevator Company v. Seeberger, etc.

handle is hein.journals/thetmr40 and id is 400 raw text is: HAUGHTON ELEVATOR COMPANY v. SEEBERGER, ETC.
Commissioner of Patents-April 3, 1950
CANCELLATIONs-BASIS OF RELIEF-ABANDONMENT
The word Escalator held to have become recognized by the general public as the name
for a moving stairway, as the result of registrant's course of conduct causing the mark to
lose significance as an indication of origin, and registration thereof cancelled.
ABANDONMENT-EvIDENCE-GENERAL
On facts of record, registrant's course of conduct causing the word Escalator to lose
its significance as an indication of origin held demonstrated by meaning of the word to the
general public resulting from registrant's own use of the word as a generic and descriptive
term in patents, in its advertising addressed to the trade, and in standard safety code pre-
pared by committee upon which registrant had responsible representatives who made no pro-
test.
Appeal from Examiner of Interferences.
Trade-mark cancellation proceeding by Haughton Elevator Company against
Charles D. Seeberger (Otis Elevator Company, assignee, substitute). Registrant
appeals from cancellation of registration. Affirmed.
Marshall, Marshall & Leonard, Toledo, Ohio, for Petitioner.
Watson, Bristol, Johnson & Leavenworth, of New York, N. Y., for Respondent.
MURPHY, A. C.:
This is an appeal from the decision of the Examiner of Trade-Mark Interfer-
ences sustaining the petition of the Haughton Elevator Company to cancel the
trade-mark Escalator Registration No. 34,724, issued May 29, 1900, to Charles
D. Seeberger, assigned to the Otis Elevator Company, and duly renewed May 29,
1930; and recommending its cancellation.
Both parties took testimony, filed briefs, and were represented at the oral hear-
ing.
The Examiner of Trade-Mark Interferences sustained the petition for cancel-
lation and recommended that the registration be cancelled on the ground that the
term escalator has become a descriptive name to both the general public and to
engineers and architects and that, to them, the term not only does not mean a mov-
ing stairway made by the respondent but rather means any moving stairway with-
out reference to the maker thereof.
He further held that the respondent not only has not been successful in pre-
venting the use of the term 'escalator' from becoming a common descriptive name,
but, by its own use thereof as a generic term, has given assent to such use.
On careful consideration of the record in this case, it appears, and it does not
seem to be disputed, that the term escalator is recognized by the general public
as the name for a moving stairway and not the source thereof. It further appears
that respondent has used the term as a generic descriptive term instead of an indi-
cation of origin, in a number of patents which have been issued to them and has also
so used the name in their advertising matter which has appeared in magazines ad-
dressed to the trade which would be likely prospective customers for such devices.

TRADE-MIARK REPORTER

40 T. M. R.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most