This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Intellectual Property
Trademark Infringement
Unfair Business Competition

Levi Strauss & Co. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co.

Published: Jan. 17, 2009 | Result Date: Dec. 22, 2008 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 07-03752 JSW Verdict –  Defense

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Raquel Pacheco

Gia L. Cincone
(Kilpatrick, Townsend & Stockton LLP)

Gregory S. Gilchrist
(Verso Law Group LLP)


Defendant

Rachel R. Davidson
(Office of the U.S. Attorney)

Michael J. Bettinger
(Sidley Austin LLP)

J. Michael Keyes
(Dorsey & Whitney LLP)


Facts

Levi Strauss & Co. owned a trademark registration for a design used on its jeans named, "Arcuate Stitching Design Trademark." Levi Strauss brought an action against Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co. for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and trade dilution due to a jeans pocket stitching design used by Abercrombie on jeans called Ruehl 925.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff claimed that Abercrombie & Fitch had infringed Levi Strauss's trademark when Abercrombie used stitching in the shape of two arcs on its jeans. Further, Levi Strauss asserted that its mark was famous and likely would be diluted by Abercrombie's design.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Abercrombie asserted that its pocket stitching design was not infringing and that plaintiff's "consumer recognition surveys" were faulty. Furthermore, Abercrombie challenged the strength of Levi's trademark.

Result

A jury returned a verdict in favor of Abercrombie on Levi Strauss & Co.'s infringement claims. It found that the Levi Strauss mark was famous but was not likely diluted by Abercrombie's design. The court must ultimately decide the dilution claim.

Deliberation

three hours

Length

13 days


#105751

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390