Nabisco, Inc. And Nabisco Brands Company, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants v. Warner-Lambert Company, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee

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 parties’ marks were “so dissimilar as to require judgment” for the defendant
• comparison of marks focuses on “overall impression ... the context in which they are found and ... totality of factors that could cause confusion ... ”
• “The cumulative effect of the differences between the parties’ products and in the commercial presentation of their marks creates distinct 18 marketplace impressions.”
• “The evaluation of the Polaroid factors is not a mechanical process where the party with the greatest number of factors weighing in its favor wins. Rather, a court should focus on the ultimate question of whether consumers are likely to be confused.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).