Audi Ag and Volkswagen of America, Inc. v. Bob D'amato, D/B/A Quattro Enthusiasts

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that it was in the public’s interest to issue an injunction to prevent consumers from being misled
• explaining that trademark infringement and false designation of origin claims are both analyzed under the same likelihood of confusion test
• finding it was in the public’s interest to issue an injunction to “prevent the consumers from being confused”
• finding it was in the public's interest to issue an injunction to “prevent the consumers from being confused”
• finding in a trademark infringement case, “[i]t was in the public’s interest to issue the injunction in order to prevent consumers from being misled.”
• affirming denial of a motion to extend a discovery deadline, where a party knew of the discovery issue in question two and a half months before the discovery deadline

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).