AND · 15usc1125:likely-confusion
VersaTop is a Federal Circuit decision applying Ninth Circuit law. The cited Sleekcraft factors are flexible, not a nationwide arithmetic formula. Actual confusion is relevant evidence but not mandatory proof of likely confusion. Remedies may require evidence beyond liability.
Exact element source
(A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person,Source:
docroot/ir/usc/title15.jsonl#title15_sec1125; Unicode character offsets [395:670] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0a5680239d11ae3247a99abab2344db45177346d2d2e3050e95c82fb39f3aca7.All variants
| Variant | Description | Merits instance blocks | Distinct cases | Example cases (up to 3 per group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| confusion/reverse-confusion | 0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 1 | 0 | No counted merits examples Excluded context examples: /f3d/932/0589-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019 — rule-announced/merits | |
| market-overlap/identical-marks-and-goods | 1 Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 0 | 1 | /f3d/921/1364-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019 — satisfied |
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Variant | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| /f3d/921/1364-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019 | Likely consumer confusion about source or sponsorship | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: law The court enters judgment on undisputed facts rather than merely finding a triable issue. The mixed fact sentence tagged cuts-against absent refers to its last clause, the asserted absence of actual confusion; its uncontested-factors clause supports the result. Absence of actual confusion does not defeat likely confusion under the flexible Ninth Circuit factors. | market-overlap/identical-marks-and-goods | These factors, as summarized in Au-Tomotive Gold , are "(1) strength of the mark(s); (2) relatedness of the goods; (3) similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) marketing channels; (6) degree of consumer care; (7) defendant's intent; (8) likelihood of expansion." 457 F.3d at 1075-76. The Ninth Circuit has emphasized that "the eight factors [ Sleekcraft ] recited are not exhaustive," and should be applied "in a flexible manner." Network Automation, 638 F.3d at 1145.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_921.jsonl#/f3d/921/1364-01; Unicode character offsets [18544:19034] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e097d77ff3e2b2660ec97b4240c13672eab0fc9d8f05781fdfaf1b120b8c1ec9.The type of goods sold by both companies-the pipe and drape systems-are identical.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_921.jsonl#/f3d/921/1364-01; Unicode character offsets [19791:19873] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e097d77ff3e2b2660ec97b4240c13672eab0fc9d8f05781fdfaf1b120b8c1ec9.It is undisputed that the parties operate in the same marketing channels-the flyers were distributed by Georgia Expo for an industry trade show.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_921.jsonl#/f3d/921/1364-01; Unicode character offsets [19990:20134] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e097d77ff3e2b2660ec97b4240c13672eab0fc9d8f05781fdfaf1b120b8c1ec9.Georgia Expo, in both its own motion for summary judgment, and in opposition to VersaTop's cross-motion, made no argument regarding these likelihood of confusion factors, contending only that there was no evidence of actual confusion.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_921.jsonl#/f3d/921/1364-01; Unicode character offsets [20363:20597] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e097d77ff3e2b2660ec97b4240c13672eab0fc9d8f05781fdfaf1b120b8c1ec9.We therefore "conclude as a matter of law that likelihood of infringement is clear cut here."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_921.jsonl#/f3d/921/1364-01; Unicode character offsets [21850:21943] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e097d77ff3e2b2660ec97b4240c13672eab0fc9d8f05781fdfaf1b120b8c1ec9. |
| /f3d/932/0589-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019 | Likely consumer confusion about source or sponsorship | not_reached Excluded from merits counts rule-announced / meritsClaimed confusion supplies context only; the court resolves the case through fair use without deciding that confusion exists or is absent. | confusion/reverse-confusion | "To prevail on either claim, a plaintiff must establish that (1) its mark is protectable and (2) the defendant's use of the mark is likely to cause confusion among consumers." CAE, Inc. , 267 F.3d at 673-74.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_932.jsonl#/f3d/932/0589-01; Unicode character offsets [5934:6141] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f6820bdcc4c8d1f7c57b328a6c51f8af1f265db990f6acb029ef1ed054bfa251.In this case, the alleged reverse confusion would occur when Gatorade used its house mark alongside the term "Sports Fuel," which would effectively coopt SportFuel's trademark and confuse consumers by leading them to believe the companies were related.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_932.jsonl#/f3d/932/0589-01; Unicode character offsets [24558:24810] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f6820bdcc4c8d1f7c57b328a6c51f8af1f265db990f6acb029ef1ed054bfa251. |
Court interpretations
interpretation
These factors, as summarized in Au-Tomotive Gold , are "(1) strength of the mark(s); (2) relatedness of the goods; (3) similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) marketing channels; (6) degree of consumer care; (7) defendant's intent; (8) likelihood of expansion." 457 F.3d at 1075-76. The Ninth Circuit has emphasized that "the eight factors [ Sleekcraft ] recited are not exhaustive," and should be applied "in a flexible manner." Network Automation, 638 F.3d at 1145.
/f3d/921/1364-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
These factors, as summarized in Au-Tomotive Gold , are "(1) strength of the mark(s); (2) relatedness of the goods; (3) similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) marketing channels; (6) degree of consumer care; (7) defendant's intent; (8) likelihood of expansion." 457 F.3d at 1075-76. The Ninth Circuit has emphasized that "the eight factors [ Sleekcraft ] recited are not exhaustive," and should be applied "in a flexible manner." Network Automation, 638 F.3d at 1145.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_921.jsonl#/f3d/921/1364-01; Unicode character offsets [18544:19034] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e097d77ff3e2b2660ec97b4240c13672eab0fc9d8f05781fdfaf1b120b8c1ec9.VersaTop is a Federal Circuit decision applying Ninth Circuit law. The cited Sleekcraft factors are flexible, not a nationwide arithmetic formula. Actual confusion is relevant evidence but not mandatory proof of likely confusion. Remedies may require evidence beyond liability.