Legal Opinion
Estee Lauder, Inc. v. the Gap, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 22, 1996No. 96 Civ. 4130 (LAK)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KAPLAN, District Judge.
Estee Lauder Inc. (“Lauder”) recently introduced a new skin moisturizer which, depending upon which of the parties is speaking, is called either “100%” or “100% Time Release Moisturizer.” The defendant, The Gap, Inc. (“Gap”), is about to launch a line of personal care products in its Old Navy (“Old Navy”) clothing stores under the umbrella name, “100% Body Care.” Lauder seeks to enjoin Gap from doing so, claiming that Gap’s use of “100% Body Care” infringes Lauder’s trademark as applied to goods of this character. This is the Court’s decision following a bench…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Polaroid Corporation v. Polarad Electronics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Abercrombie & Fitch Company v. Hunting World, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Sweats Fashions, Inc. v. Pannill Knitting Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Estee Lauder Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee v. The Gap, Inc. D/B/A Old Navy Clothing Company, Defendant-Counterclaimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Clinique Laboratories, Inc. v. Dep Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Dove Audio, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1997
- Cherry River Music Co. v. Simitar Entertainment, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1999
- Aini v. Sun Taiyang Co., Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.