Nola Spice Designs, L.L.C. v. Haydel Enterprises, 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 “[t]rademark infringement claims are governed by the Lanham Act.”
• noting that the Fifth Circuit relies on the spectrum set forth in Abercrombie to determine the distinctiveness of a word mark
• noting that the “probative value of advertising depends on the presence of data regarding its reach, frequency, and duration”
• finding that a three-and-a-half year period before the accused product entered the market was brief and did not create a factual issue with respect to secondary meaning
• finding that no reasonable juror could find that imagination was required to link MARDI GRAS BEAD DOG with clothing bearing an image of a Mardi Gras bead dog
• stating that where the nonmovant bears the burden of proof at trial, the movant may merely point to the absence of evidence to shift the burden to the non-movant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).