From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...
A.J. Canfield Co. v. Honickman
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
808 F.2d 291 (1986)
A.J. Canfield Co. (Canfield) (plaintiff) was a bottler of soft drinks that became well known for producing “Canfield’s Diet Chocolate Fudge Soda.” Canfield attempted to trademark the term “chocolate fudge” in 1985, but the application was denied by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on the ground that the term was generic. Concord Beverage Co. (Concord) (defendant) began selling its own diet chocolate fudge soda in 1985. On August 30, 1985, Canfield filed for a preliminary injunction in the district court to prevent Concord from using the phrase “Diet Chocolate Fudge Soda” on Concord’s soft drinks, as it constituted trademark infringement. The district court denied Canfield’s preliminary injunction, and Canfield appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Becker, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 218,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.