890 F. Supp. 2d 278
S.D.N.Y.2012Background
- Deli is a Manhattan kosher deli; HAG operates a Las Vegas theme restaurant with Heart Attack Grill and four bypass burger marks; Deli offers Instant Heart Attack Sandwich since 2004 and seeks to register a Triple Bypass Sandwich; USPTO had preliminarily denied Instant Heart Attack Sandwich due to likelihood of confusion; this suit seeks declaratory judgments on both marks and potential concurrent-use arrangements; court grants some uses and dismisses others, resolving disputes and fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Likelihood of confusion with Instant Heart Attack Sandwich | No present likelihood of confusion for current use; limited concurrent-use approved. | ||
| Concurrent-use / seniority for Instant Heart Attack Sandwich | Deli senior use supports concurrent use | HAG as senior registrant controls exclusive rights | Concurrent-use arrangement approved for Manhattan; exclusive tri-state use denied. |
| Concurrent-use / Triple Bypass Sandwich | Deli seeks concurrent use rights | HAG consents to structured concurrent-use with safeguards | Concurrent-use order granted with restrictions on signage and images. |
| Use in commerce / jurisdiction for Instant Heart Attack Sandwich | Mark used in menus and online; affects interstate commerce | Unclear use in commerce | Court finds use in commerce supports jurisdiction. |
| HAG's counterclaims / dismissal | HAG’s counterclaims dismissed; no fee award when not exceptional. |
Key Cases Cited
- Patsy’s Italian Rest. Inc. v. Banas, 658 F.3d 254 (2d Cir. 2011) (use in commerce can be broad; prior-use considerations in Lanham Act)
- Star Indus. Inc. v. Bacardi & Co. Ltd., 412 F.3d 373 (2d Cir. 2005) (eight-factor Polaroid likelihood-of-confusion test)
- Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elecs. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir.1961) (leading Polaroid eight-factor test for confusion)
- Brennan’s Inc. v. Brennan’s Restaurant LLC, 360 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2004) (geographic remoteness matters in restaurant confusion cases)
- Larry Harmon Pictures Corp. v. Williams Rest. Corp., 929 F.2d 662 (Fed. Cir.1991) (service-mark use in interstate context; travel/ad publication relevance)
- Dawn Donut Co. v. Hart’s Food Stores Inc., 267 F.2d 358 (2d Cir.1959) (presumption of exclusive rights upon registration; concurrent-use framework)