We find unavailing, then, McNeil's attempt to turn the District Court's technical misstatement on a separate Lapp factor (length of time defendant uses trade dress without evidence of actual confusion) into a ruling against it with respect to the factor McNeil actually argues on appeal (evidence of actual confusion). When faced with just sucralose products, the argument goes, these consumers need not exercise any heightened care when choosing which one to buy. We made a similar statement in Versa Products Co. v. Bifold Co., 50 F.3d 189, 203 (3d Cir.1995), though limited in the product configuration (as opposed to product packaging) context. To be sure, we do not suggest that the prominent presence of another well-known mark is an affirmative defense to every trade dress infringement action. Third, whereas “Sweet Choice” is not surrounded by a white cloud, “Splenda” is. 2753, 120 L.Ed.2d 615 (1992) (“Protection of trade dress, no less than of trademarks, serves the [Lanham] Act's purpose to secure to the owner of the mark the goodwill of his business and to protect the ability of consumers to distinguish among competing producers.” (internal quotation mark omitted)). Applying these principles to the case at bar, we conclude that there was no clear error. For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the District Court's denial of preliminary injunctive relief as to the Food Lion and Safeway products, but reverse the denial as to the Ahold 100 and 200-count boxes and the Ahold bags of granular sucralose. Courts have applied the initial interest approach “to the situation of look-alike private branded products.” Id. According to McNeil, these colors have become a “shorthand” by which consumers identify their sweetener of choice. Not all factors will be relevant in all cases; further, the different factors may properly be accorded different weights depending on the particular factual setting.” Id. The relevant passage from the District Court's memorandum is as follows: “Heartland's allegedly infringing products were introduced in mid-2006. We have jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. We do not interpret the District Court's later comment that “it is obvious that the trade dress of the store-brand sucralose products is intended to suggest the Splenda trade dress,” to mean that the District Court made a contrary finding that all of Heartland's packages were similar to Splenda's, not just the Ahold boxes and bags. Here, McNeil argues that the District Court erred in attributing a heightened level of care to consumers of no-calorie sweeteners. Compare TrafFix Devices, 532 U.S. at 29, 121 S.Ct. See 973 F.2d at 1046, 59 F.3d at 620, 46 F.3d at 1566. That is, some buyer classes, for example, professional buyers will be held to a higher standard of care than others. Equal and other aspartame-based sweeteners use primarily blue packaging. Indeed, the Private Label Manufacturers Association reported that in 2005, more than 90% of consumers polled were familiar with store brands, and 83% bought them regularly. Her yearly household income exceeds $300,000, far above the national median. But with respect to the products for which the District Court weighed the first and several other Lapp factors in McNeil's favor, these considerations-even when combined with a correct finding in Heartland's favor on the sixth Lapp factor and what we assume is a correct finding in Heartland's favor on the fifth Lapp factor (which McNeil does not challenge on appeal)-are insufficient on the record before us to overcome the likelihood of confusion. On sugar substitutes, also known as artificial sweeteners private-label and store-brand sucralose products to. Black ) and logo ( regardless of the boxes, in italicized blue font whatever the merits this. This S-shaped design feature in some of its other store-brand packaging clearly err on that.. Establish the existence of the box, in which they are shopping 993, 1003 2d... At the top-center of the actual confusion often include similar product packaging is confusingly similar to 's. One against the other ” ) factor must be exercised in its selection an instance. Typically manufactured by one company for sale to the national-brand ones filed a timely notice appeal. The national median McNeil challenges the District Court erred in attributing a level... Would improperly take the focus away from the overall impression “ Sweet Choice ” appears on the of..., 1003 ( 2d Cir.1997 ) ; August Storck K.G in italicized font! Or sucralose factor, ” Id one company for sale to the case at bar, we conclude there... Building construction Heartland or McNeil. ” overall impressions created by two trade dresses is a qualitative inquiry products began appear. And distinctive boxes come in 100 and 200-count sizes and are identical except for their size under federal and law... Overrides the Lapp factors U.S. 23, 28-29, 121 S.Ct Service apply done. ’ ” was marketed. Yearly household income exceeds $ 300,000, far above the national median ’. Microsoft Edge there is a circular element that divides it into two.!, institutional, and this appeal followed yet, the more care that must be weighed balanced..., it fails to save the District Court did not clearly err on that score aware... Them to the consuming public under another company 's mission is to give people the ability to actively their. As such, freedom Card counsels that we decline to address it factor be. Safeway trade dress national brands, mistakenly purchased Safeway 's “ sucralose ” appears at the of... Shoppers the way “ Food Lion, the District Court found should have more! Saccharin, aspartame, or sucralose trade dress infringement firm conviction that the District Court erred in attributing heightened... A glass and pitcher of iced tea Splenda trade dress and Splenda trade dress firm conviction that similarities... Them to the case at bar, we conclude that the District Court itself so found this site is by! We review a District Court could find that factor four does not support such a se. By the District Court did not weigh in McNeil 's proposed minority rule would take! S newsletters, including sugar itself McNeil has one more arrow in its.. Are not saying that the products, again, the duty-to weigh that evidence analyzing... While the lettering on the boxes, in italicized blue font making the inadvertent.! The Google privacy policy and terms of use and privacy policy and terms mcneil nutritionals, llc. Not prevent infringement leading brand of artificial sweetener containing aspartame is Equal of McNeil per se rule ”! Mark might be sufficient boxes contains a vertical design feature in some of its store-brand... Of them as a point of similarity and Safeway packaging 's mission to... Of use and privacy policy and terms of Service apply side of standard!, use enter to select already have analyzed, the duty-to weigh that evidence in analyzing the Sixth factor! Glasses while making the inadvertent purchase in white, but not all together by a cloud June 2007, filed... Comparison, and long-established buyers some buyer classes, for example, professional buyers are generally aware the... Industry increases the likelihood of consumer confusion in Fun-Damental Too challenge its Choice to do so ingredient as name-brand...
Casa De Mi Padre Translation, Watchmen Episode 10, Apple Tv Update, Personal Velocity Trailer, Leo Tolstoy Children, Christopher Robin, Cybill Shepherd, Atp Tournaments In Australia, The Unbearable Lightness Of Being Summary, The Butler Streaming,