From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.
United States Supreme Court
456 U.S. 844 (1982)
Ives Laboratories, Inc. (Ives) (plaintiff) was a pharmaceutical company that held a patent for the drug cyclandelate. Ives sold cyclandelate under the registered trademark “Cyclospasmol” in a 200-mg dose in a blue capsule and a 400-mg dose in a capsule that was blue and red. After Ives’s patent for cyclandelate had expired, Inwood Laboratories and other generic drug manufacturers (the generic manufacturers) (defendants) began selling cyclandelate in capsules that mimicked the same dosage and color scheme as the Cyclospasmol capsules. These generic products were supplied in bulk to wholesalers and pharmacists in containers that accurately indicated their source of origin, but the generic capsules themselves did not identify any source of origin. Ives alleged that pharmacists were illegally dispensing generic capsules as Cyclospasmol capsules, and that the generic manufactures had induced this infringing activity by producing the generic capsules in the same color and dosage scheme as the Cyclospasmol capsules. Ives sued the generic manufacturers under vicarious liability for trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act and state law. The district court held for the generic manufacturers, finding that they had not induced the alleged infringement. Upon appeal, the court of appeals held the generic manufacturers were liable for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, ruling that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of liability. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (O’Connor, J.)
Concurrence (White, 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 604,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead 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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 604,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 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.