Bose Corp. v. Ejaz’s Empirical Analysis
732 F.3d 17 · 2013
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1057 (§ 7 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))
Relies on Rex Trailer Company v. United States · Noviello v. City of Boston · Trans-Spec Truck Service, Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc. · Zapatha v. Dairy Mart, Inc. · Societe Des Produits Nestle, S.A. v. Casa Helvetia, 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]o succeed on a claim of trademark infringement, a plaintiff must establish (1) that its mark is entitled to trademark protection, and (2) that the allegedly infringing use is likely to cause consumer confusion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shea v. Millett“Fraud is an affirmative defense that must be pleaded with particularity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.