Fortune Dynamic, Inc. v. Victoria's Secret Stores Brand Management, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a district court abused its discretion 23 excluding a survey because it failed to properly screen participants, and was “highly 24 suggestive.”
• concluding that the defendant had an “abundance of alternative words” at its disposal
• noting that “similarities are weighed more heavily than differences” in this analysis (internal quotation marks omitted)
• concluding the survey was admissible despite 11 shortcomings of the survey including failure to replicate real world conditions, suggestiveness, and 12 counterintuitive results
• noting that summary judgment is disfavored in trademark cases and that jury is in better posi tion to determine “fair use” based upon “evidence of malicious intent”
• explaining that the more 26 “obvious[]” the connection between the term and the good or service is, the less 27 28 1 conceptually strong the term is

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).