United States Second Circuit

In a trademark infringement action by Starbucks Corp. regarding a competitor's use of the name "Charbucks," judgment for defendant is affirmed in part where: 1) the district court did not clearly err in finding that the Charbucks Marks were minimally similar to the Starbucks Marks; 2) the Charbucks line of coffee was marketed as a product of very high quality - as Starbucks also purported its coffee to be - which was inconsistent with the concept of tarnishment. However, the judgment is vacated in part where the district court needed to conduct further proceedings on the issue of whether Starbucks demonstrated a likelihood of dilution by "blurring" under federal trademark law.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/03/2009
• Published 12/03/2009

Judges

• MINER, Circuit Judge:, Before:  MINER and LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges, and TRAGER, District Judge.

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• David H. Bernstein and Robert K. Fitzpatrick, Debevoise Plimpton LLP, New York, NY;  John W. Crittenden and Gavin L. Charlston, Cooley Godward Kronish LLP, San Francisco, CA;  John R. Posthumus and Lucky Vidmar, Greenberg Traurig LLP, Denver CO, for Amicus Curiae International Trademark Association.


• For Appellees:
  
• Mark N. Mutterperl, John C. Rawls, and Sarah Silbert, Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., New York, NY, for plaintiffs-counter-defendants-appellants., Christopher Cole and John-Mark Turner, Sheehan, Phinney, Bass + Green, P.A., Manchester, NH, for defendant-counter-claimant-appellee.