CRAIG R. BELL, individual d/b/a DESTINEE' -- EPLORIUMS, Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, vs. HARLEY DAVIDSON MOTOR COMPANY, et al., Defendants/Counterclaimants., 539 F. Supp. 2d 1249

Summary

The manufacture had been in business since 1903 and offered accessories, apparel, and general merchandise bearing its logo. At dispute was use of a certain phrase. The owner because to use the phrase in 1994 and included it on apparel sold through his business. He obtained a federal trademark registration for the phrase in 1994. The owner's sales dropped to almost zero in 1998. Between 2001 and 2005, the owner sold no products bearing the trademark and had no licensees selling such products. The court found that because the manufacture's prior usage would rebut the presumption of validity of the trademark, the owner was unable to establish, as a matter of law, that his trademark was valid. A reasonable jury could find that the manufacturer's use of the phrase was not likely to confuse consumers as to the source of the manufacturer's products. The state's common-law doctrine of misappropriation did not extend to trademark infringement claims. The manufacturer established its defense of ...