United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2019-05-14
15usc1125: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: civil trademark infringement action under Lanham Act § 43(a) joined with a claim for breach of a prior settlement agreement; motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) denied; result: claimant-won; claim: (a)
Uncertainty
None recorded
Misfit
None recorded
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 17
| Case | Statutory person including state entities and officials | Judicial domestic infringing-use limit | Use in commerce connected with goods or services | Enforceable source-identifying mark or trade dress | Likely consumer confusion about source or sponsorship | Entitlement to sue and protected commercial interest |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Niagara Bottling, LLC v. CC1 Ltd. — 381 F. Supp. 3d 175 (2019) · United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2019 (15usc1125: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 7–12 of 17
| Case | Good-faith descriptive use other than as a mark | State sovereign immunity unless a valid route permits suit | Misleading affiliation approval or sponsorship | Claimant proves nonfunctionality | Commercial advertising or promotion | False or misleading factual representation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Niagara Bottling, LLC v. CC1 Ltd. — 381 F. Supp. 3d 175 (2019) · United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2019 (15usc1125: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 13–17 of 17
| Case | Judicial actual-deception or tendency-to-deceive requirement | Judicial materiality requirement for purchasing decisions | Judicial zone-of-interests limit to commercial injury | Judicial proximate-causation requirement | Remedy-specific proof |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Niagara Bottling, LLC v. CC1 Ltd. — 381 F. Supp. 3d 175 (2019) · United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2019 (15usc1125: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Niagara Bottling, LLC v. CC1 Ltd. — 381 F. Supp. 3d 175 (2019) · United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (15usc1125: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Likely consumer confusion about source or sponsorship | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a); party: CC1 Limited Partnership; count: Eco-Air trademark infringement; subject: party=CC1 Limited Partnership; count=Eco-Air trademark infringement Under First Circuit eight-factor analysis, plaintiff plausibly pleaded likelihood of confusion based on near-identical design, identical bottled water product, and shared commercial trade channels in Puerto Rico, notwithstanding the absence of pleaded actual confusion. | multi-factor-similarity/bottled-water-packaging | Plaintiff provides a description and image of their Eco-Air Marks and alleges Defendant "adopted a design whose dominant features and overall appearance are practically identical ... [the] mark is also placed inside a white circle with half of the circle outlines in color blue with a green leaf concavely position at the bottom of the circle."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [17610:17954] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3.In the case at bar, both parties have similarities of services and customers because they target the general public in Puerto Rico and sell their product in similar ways; stores, online, among others.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [18137:18337] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3.In the instant case, Plaintiff has not provided the Court with any facts or allegations that can be construed as confusion.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [19153:19276] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3.Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiff satisfies the two prongs to establish trademark infringement.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [20962:21067] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3. |
| Niagara Bottling, LLC v. CC1 Ltd. — 381 F. Supp. 3d 175 (2019) · United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (15usc1125: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Enforceable source-identifying mark or trade dress | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a); party: CC1 Limited Partnership; count: Eco-Air trademark infringement; subject: party=CC1 Limited Partnership; count=Eco-Air trademark infringement District court treats the pleaded federal registrations as satisfying the protectability prong at the pleading stage. | federally registered word marks for a bottled-water bottle and package, registrations attached to the complaint | Plaintiff is the owner of federal trademark registrations for Eco-Air Bottle word mark in International Class 32 and Eco-Air Package work mark in International Cass 16 ("collectively "Eco-Air Marks"); along with common law rights ("Composite Marks").Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [545:795] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3.Moreover, Plaintiff complies with registering the trademarks before the United States Patent Trademark Office.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [20633:20743] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3.However, if the mark is registered, the first prong of a trademark infringement case is then satisfied.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [15686:15789] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3.In the instant case, the Court finds the first prong has been satisfied by the federal trademark registration that entitles Plaintiff to the trademark rights.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_381.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/381/0175-01; Unicode character offsets [16250:16408] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7987994b779dabc8433e7979b5759eb92bba76c36aa5a22dfe7670bfb0665ed3. |