Montana v. Rogers

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the absence of such evidence is not determinative
• stating that “[t]he competing services need not be identical to entitle the holder of the registered mark to protection”
• a likelihood of confusion also exists “when the consumer would be likely to assume that the identified services are in some way associated with another service-provider.”
• denial of preliminary injunction warranted where plaintiff made no independent showing of irreparable harm
• test for infringement of service mark for directly competing shopping centers

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).