finding that 6% confusion rate was an insufficient level of alleged confusion
Summary of this case from IDV North America, Inc. v. S & M Brands, Inc.No. 88-5221.
June 20, 1988.
Appeal from the D.N.J., Politan, J., 682 F.Supp. 269.
AFFIRMED.
finding that 6% confusion rate was an insufficient level of alleged confusion
Summary of this case from IDV North America, Inc. v. S & M Brands, Inc.Full title:Treasurer, Inc. v. Philadelphia Nat. Bank
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Date published: Jun 20, 1988
However, Marrero is not without criticism. The district court in Sullivan v. New Jersey Div. of Gaming…
WMX Technologies, Inc. v. MillerThe analysis in Marrero has been criticized by other courts. See Cooper v. Dupnik, 924 F.2d 1520, 1534 (9th…