Champagne Louis Roederer, S.A. v. Delicato Vineyards

Delicato Vineyards (defendant) filed an application to register the trademark Crystal Creek in connection with wine. Thereafter, Champagne Louis Roederer, S.A. (plaintiff) filed an opposition to the registration based on its registered trademarks Cristal and Cristal Champagne. The United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board dismissed Roederer’s opposition after determining there was no likelihood of confusion between the marks. The board treated the dissimilarity of the marks with respect to appearance, sound, significance, and commercial impression as the dispositive likelihood-of-confusion factor, concluding that this dissimilarity alone precluded any reasonable likelihood of confusion. Specifically, the board found that the appearance and sound of the marks were dissimilar and that the marks Cristal and Crystal Creek evoked different commercial impressions in the minds of consumers: Cristal suggested a certain clarity of the wine within the bottle or the glass of which the bottle itself was made, and Crystal Creek suggested a clear and remote creek or stream. Roederer appealed the board’s dismissal, arguing that it was clear error of law for the board to rely solely on the dissimilarity of the marks in evaluating the likelihood of confusion and to fail to accord due weight to the other likelihood-of-confusion factors, as set forth in the case of In re E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., all of which were found in Roederer’s favor.