ipl-logo

Case Study: Starbucks Corp LLC V. Wolfe's Borough Coffee Inc.

1012 Words5 Pages

The case I selected was Starbucks Corp LLC v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee Inc., docket number 12-354-cv, decided on November 15, 2013. The Starbucks Corporation and Brand LLC went to appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, after being denied an injunction under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995. This would prohibit Wolfe’s Borough Coffee from supplying Black Bear Micro Roastery their sub-company using “Mister Charbucks”, “Mr. Charbucks”, and “Charbucks Blend.” After an initial bench trial the District Court concluded that Starbucks failed to prove that Charbucks Coffee is most likely to dilute the famous Starbucks brand Marks. They also denied the request for injunction. The famous Starbucks Coffee established and originated in Seattle in 1971, and soon developed into 8,700 retail stores worldwide. The company holds at least 57 valid United States trademark registrations that include their logo of the “Starbucks Mark” or “Marks”. Starbucks Marks are displayed on signs, merchandise, in store, and online. Their advertisers had devoted substantial time, effort, and …show more content…

The telephone survey really did show their perspective and as to why it would confuse people in more ways than one. In conclusion it would dilute the international coffee company. I also see that Black Bear admitted that they knew of Starbucks when naming their coffee blend that, as well as their famous charred coffee. Their point about having it used in a coffee war in Boston, gave the impression that they saw conflict caused back then and knew it may cause a rise. Also both companies are within the states as well as international, so it could an issue. They also seem very passionate about getting this injunction prove and diminished, because they have gone to court several times. Yet, after proving dilution Black Bear was still sided

Open Document