Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Lever Brother Co. v. United States

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
981 F.2d 1330 (1993)


Facts

Lever Brother Company (Lever) (plaintiff) sold dish-washing soap in the United States and, through an affiliate, in Great Britain under identical trademarks. Each trademark was registered in each country. The soaps and packaging were formulated differently to suit the two markets accordingly. An unauthorized gray market for the products caused the British soap to be imported and sold in the United States, resulting in consumer complaints directed at Lever. Lever brought suit against the United States Customs Service (Customs) (defendant) on the grounds that § 42 of the Lanham Act prohibited the import of the soap from Britain containing a United States trademark. Customs relied on a federal regulation that created an exception to § 42 for goods bearing a foreign trademark, if the company that owned the foreign trademark was under common ownership with the company that owned the United States trademark. Customs argued that the exception to § 42 was valid, because § 42 only prohibits the use of a trademark that copies or simulates a United States trademark. The district court found that the exception did not comply with the plain meaning of § 42 and granted summary judgment in favor of Lever. Customs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Sentelle, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. 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.

  2. 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 222,000 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.