International Market Brands v. Martin International Corp.
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21913
| W.D. Pa. | 2012Background
- IMB sues Martin for declaratory judgment re BLACK PEARL trademark; Martin counters for infringement and related relief.
- IMB moves to strike Anthony Fletcher's expert report on likelihood of confusion.
- Fletcher is a trademark attorney, not a product/industry expert, but Rioja argues his qualifications may suffice.
- Court evaluates Rule 702 qualification, reliability, and fit; focus is helpfulness to determine confusion.
- Court partially strikes sections 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10 of Fletcher’s report, allows others.
- Conclusion: Fletcher may opine on some factors but not provide impermissible legal conclusions or purely common-sense observations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fletcher is qualified as an expert under Rule 702 | IMB argues Fletcher lacks industry-specific expertise. | Martin contends Fletcher’s trademark expertise suffices. | Fletcher is qualified to testify on trademark confusion. |
| Whether Fletcher’s testimony is helpful and admissible under Rule 702 | Fletcher offers improper legal conclusions and common-sense facts. | Fletcher’s factors aid the trier of fact. | Some testimony is helpful; certain sections are not and are struck. |
| Which Lapp factors Fletcher may testify about without invading juror instruction | Fletcher’s full report should inform the jury on the ten factors. | Certain factor analysis risks legal instruction or non-helpful observations. | Factors 2, 7, 8, 9 may be allowed; factors 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 struck. |
Key Cases Cited
- Interpace Corp. v. Lapp, Inc., 721 F.2d 460 (3d Cir. 1983) (non-exhaustive Lapp factors for confusion; admissibility depends on helpfulness)
- In re Paoli R.R. Yard Litig., 35 F.3d 717 (3d Cir. 1994) (ultimate touchstone is helpfulness; reliability and fit for expert testimony)
- Betterbox Communications Ltd. v. BB Technologies, Inc., 300 F.3d 325 (3d Cir. 2002) (requires specialized knowledge for admissible expert testimony)