The Nautilus Group, Inc. (Formerly Known as Direct Focus, Inc.) v. Icon Health and Fitness, 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 the district court’s finding of “actual confusion” was improper where “the relatively small number of calls presented by Nautilus renders this evidence too unreliable”
• holding that the district court’s finding of “actual confusion” was improper where “the relatively small number of calls presented by Nautilus renders this evidence too unreliable”
• defining an arbitrary mark as a “known word used in an unexpected or uncommon way” and observing that such marks are typically strong
• “an arbitrary mark is a known word used in an unexpected or uncommon way” and is “typically strong” (citation omitted)
• “In a trademark case, we apply the law of the applicable regional circuit, in this case, the Ninth Circuit.”
• An arbitrary mark is “a known word used in an unexpected or uncommon way.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).