Continental Connector Corp. v. Continental Specialties Corp.
District Court, D. Connecticut
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. *
This trademark infringement suit involves the familiar but difficult problem of determining whether infringement has occurred absent proof of actual confusion. Section 32 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (1976), on which the principal question in this suit is based, prohibits the use of any 'trademark “likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive purchasers.” Proof of actual confusion often satisfies this test; in many cases it will obviate the need for additional proof and vitiate any defense based on the absence of such proof. But…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Polaroid Corporation v. Polarad Electronics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Maternally Yours, Inc. v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Scarves by Vera, Inc. v. Todo Imports Ltd. (Inc.)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- The W. E. Bassett Company v. Revlon, Inc., the W. E. Bassett Company v. Revlon, Inc., (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- W.W.W. Pharmaceutical Company, Inc. v. The Gillette CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Vitarroz Corporation v. Borden, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Allen v. National Video, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1985
- Kinark Corp. v. Camelot, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1982
- HealthOne of Denver, Inc. v. UnitedHealth Group Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 2012
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.