Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Brief

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

  • Law School Case Brief

Kellogg Co. v. Toucan Golf, Inc. - 337 F.3d 616 (6th Cir. 2003)

Rule:

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit uses an eight-part test for determining when a likelihood of confusion exists between the origins of two products. The factors are: (1) the strength of the plaintiff's mark; (2) the relatedness of the goods or services offered by the parties; (3) similarity of the marks; (4) any evidence of actual confusion; (5) the marketing channels used by the parties; (6) the probable degree of purchaser care and sophistication; (7) the defendant's intent; and (8) the likelihood of either party expanding its product line using the marks. Not all of these factors will be relevant in every case, and the ultimate question remains whether relevant consumers are likely to believe that the products or services offered by the parties are affiliated in some way. None of the factors is dispositive, but the factors guide us in our ultimate determination. 

Facts:

Plaintiff-Appellant Kellogg Company appealed from the district court's affirmation of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's (TTAB) decision to permit the registration of the word mark "Toucan Gold" by Defendant-Appellee Toucan Golf, Inc. (TGI), a manufacturer of promotional golf equipment. Kellogg claimed that TGI's word mark and its corresponding toucan logo create a likelihood of confusion with, and dilute the distinctiveness of, Kellogg's five federally-registered and incontestable "Toucan Sam" logos and word mark under the Lanham Act as amended, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051, et seq.

Issue:

Does TGI's use of the word mark "Toucan Gold" create a likelihood of confusion among consumers?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the decision of the district court and denied Kellogg's claims. TGI's use of the word mark "Toucan Gold" does not create a likelihood of confusion among consumers, principally because TGI's use of its mark is in an industry far removed from that of Kellogg. Also, TGI's toucan logo, as a realistic toucan design, does not create a likelihood of confusion with Kellogg's more cartoonish "Toucan Sam" designs. Furthermore, Kellogg has not presented any evidence that TGI's use of its marks actually dilutes the fame or distinctiveness of any of Kellogg's marks.

Access the full text case

Essential Class Preparation Skills

  • How to Answer Your Professor's Questions
  • How to Brief a Case
  • Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required)

Essential Class Resources

  • CivPro
  • Contracts
  • Constitutional Law
  • Corporations /Business Organizations
  • Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure/Investigation
  • Evidence
  • Legal Ethics/Professional Responsibility
  • Property
  • Secured Transactions
  • Torts
  • Trusts & Estates