Kemp v. Bumble Bee Seafoods, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
398 F.3d 1049 (2005)

- Written by Sarah Holley, JD
Facts
In 1985, Louis E. Kemp (Mr. Kemp) (plaintiff) started Kemp Foods, Inc., which made and sold artificial crab products containing surimi, a low-fat, processed fish product. Then, through a series of sales, which included all trademarks, Bumble Bee Seafoods (Bumble Bee) (defendant) acquired the surimi business. Before October 1995, Bumble Bee and its predecessors spent millions to promote and market the Louis Kemp marks and had thereafter achieved a strong brand awareness and share of the surimi market. Then, in October 1995, Mr. Kemp began selling wild rice, chicken and wild rice soup, and wild rice with stir-fried vegetables under the Louis Kemp mark. Bumble Bee sent Mr. Kemp a cease-and-desist letter, to which Mr. Kemp responded that he believed the agreement under which he had sold the surimi business permitted his use of the Louis Kemp mark on non-surimi products. Mr. Kemp thereafter filed suit to seek a declaratory judgment regarding his contractual right to use the Louis Kemp mark. Bumble Bee, in turn, filed trademark-infringement and dilution counterclaims against Mr. Kemp. During trial, Mr. Kemp made clear his intention to take advantage of the goodwill and brand awareness that Bumble Bee and its predecessors had built. The district court issued adverse rulings against Bumble Bee, which Bumble Bee appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Melloy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.