Jada Toys, Inc. v. Mattel, 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 reasonable jury could find “Hot Wheels” famous because, inter alia, Mattel had spent $350 million on Hot Wheels advertising since its inception
• ruling that “Hot Wheels” mark for toy cars could be found famous based on more than 37 years of use, $350 million in advertising, and sales of 3 billion units
• noting that claims of trademark infringement, false designation of 27 origin, and unfair competition were all “subject to the same test”
• noting that claims 22 of trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition were all 23 “subject to the same test”
• noting that claims for false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, and unfair competition \are subject to the same test.\
• noting that claims for 25 trademark infringement and unfair competition are “subject to the same test”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).