Jordache Enterprises, Inc. v. Levi Strauss & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• determining that the '501' mark is arbitrary and fanciful as it \does not describe any particular quality or characteristic of jeans or jean apparel\
• finding the degree of similarity between two marks to be an issue of fact for the jury where the \extremely close\ numeral trademarks were to be used in conjunction with a company name
• Dilution from blurring “ ‘refers to a loss of distinctiveness, a weakening of a mark’s propensity to bring to mind a particular product, service, or source of either.’” (quotations omitted)
• “Factors to consider in determining the competitive proximity of the products include appearance, style, function, fashion appeal, advertising orientation and price.”
• “Factors to consider in determining the competitive proximity of the products include appearance, style, function, fashion appeal, advertising orientation and price.” (citing McGregor-Doniger, 599 F.2d at 1134)
• “Types of confusion that constitute trademark infringement include where: (1) prospective purchasers believe that the senior user sponsored or otherwise approved of the junior user's trademark . . . ; (2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).