44 rmnnmn nnroarnn.
or inscription by the complainants as deprives them of the right to
be protected in the use of the same, is, I think, not shown.
The case seems to be a clear one for a preliminary injunction to
the extent indicated, and upon the execution by the complainants of
a bond inthe usual form, in the sum of $2,000, with surety to be ap-
proved by the clerk, an injunction, pendente lite, will issue, restrain-
ing the defendant from placing on the bags used by him in putting
his peas on the market, a label or inscription resembling in design,
form, and arrangement, or collocation of identical words, the label or
inscription of the complainants, as does the label now used by the
defendant.
The printing of the letter "A" over the word “Landreths’," by the
defendant, on the bags of peas more recently sent out by him, does
not, in the form and style in which it is printed, relieve his label of
its tendency to mislead.
Goonman Runner. Co. v. Du and another.' ‘
(Oircuit Court, E. D. Missouri. October 11, 1884.)
1. Tmxnn-MA1urs—INrnmonmnNr.
No manufacturer will be permitted to stamp upon or attach to his goods the
name of another manufacturer.
2. S.mm—NAm·m or- Pyrnnr.
Semble, that after the expiration of a patent no manufacturer of the patented
article can appropriate the name, or the principal part of the name, of the pat-
*811lJ ES B tI'HdC-lI13l'k•
In Equity. ·
This is a suit to restrain the defendants from advertising or sell-
ing rubber goods, not manufactured by the complainant, with the
name of "The Goodyear Co." in any manner annexed or attached
thereto.
Thos. T. Gantt and A. at John F. Lec, for complainant.
McFarland, Reynolds at P1£I»7"I"l807l·, for defendants.
Tnnyr, J., (orally.) The litigation connected with this Goodyear
` rubber business I am fully conversant with, as the Reports are full
of it, and during 20 odd years I have had to look into the matter in
causes pending before me. It seems to the court this is an effort to
appropriate the name, “Goodyear." The patent has expired. Now,
if, after the termination of the patent, a man can adopt the name of
the patent, and use it as a trade··mark, he is, in violation of the laws
of the United States, getting an exclusive right which does not belong
to him. The case before Judge Wanmon, as I heard it tread, is
¤Reported by Benj. F. Rex, Esq., of the St. Louis bar. »