Hmh Publishing Co., Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and Playboy Clubs International, Inc., a Delaware Corporation v. Douglas Lambert’s Empirical Analysis
482 F.2d 595 · 1973
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently December 2006 · most notably Amf Incorporated v. Sleekcraft Boats E (1979), Bandag, Inc. v. Al Bolser's Tire Stores, Inc. (1984)
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (§ 32 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1121 (§ 39 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on United States v. Sisson · Stoner v. California · Fleischmann Distilling Corp. v. Maier Brewing Co. · Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Company · K-S-H Plastics, Inc. v. Carolite, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the facts are not in dispute and the issue of confusing similarity is based solely upon the comparison of the marks in the context of extrinsic facts, the appellate court may determine the issue of confusing similarity.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'lest it swallow up all competition in the claim of protection against trade name infringement,' " Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. Procter & Gamble Co., 434 F.2d 794 , 803 n.3 (9th Cir. 1970) (quoting Coffee Dan's, Inc. v. Coffee Don's Charcoal Broiler, 305 F.Supp. 1210, 1217 n.13 (N.D.Cal.1969)); HMH Publishing Co. v. Lambert, 482 F.2d 595 , 599 & n.8 (9th Cir. 1973) (same). 35 Sears' use of "Bagzilla”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Infringement under the Lanham Act ‘likely to cause confusion’ test means that the average purchaser or customer would be likely to believe that the infringer’s product' ‘had some connection’ with the product of the copyright owner. Fleischmann Distilling Co. v. Maier Brewing Co., 314 F.2d 149, 155 (9th Cir. 1963).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.