Menashe v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc.

409 F. Supp. 2d 412 (2006)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Menashe v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc.

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
409 F. Supp. 2d 412 (2006)

Facts

In the autumn of 2002, V Secret Catalogue, Inc. (V Secret) (defendant) began to develop a line of women’s panties to capitalize on the popularity of low-rise pants and the trend among young women of wearing lingerie-style items as outerwear. Between March 30 and June 1, 2004, V Secret decided on the name Sexy Little Things for its new collection. Meanwhile, in June 2004, Ronit Menashe and Audrey Quock (collectively, Menashe) (plaintiff) formed a business venture to produce a line of women’s underwear. In July 2004, Menashe decided to name her new line Sexy Little Things. But on July 28, 2004, V Secret launched its Sexy Little Things line in four Victoria’s Secret stores located in Ohio, Michigan, and California, displaying the Sexy Little Things name on focal wall and table signage, hangtags, and window displays. Also on July 28, 2004, the Ohio stores opened to consumers. On August 31, 2004, Menashe registered www.sexylittlethings.com in preparation for building a website to sell the underwear line over the internet. V Secret started to use the Sexy Little Things name in catalogues on September 4, 2004 and on its website five days later. On September 13, 2004, Menashe filed an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application for Sexy Little Thing, Sexy Little Things, a variation on the original name. About ten days later, Menashe hired a website designer to create the website for the registered domain name. On November 16, 2004, Menashe received a cease-and-desist letter from V Secret’s outside counsel, advising that V Secret had been using Sexy Little Things as a trademark since prior to the filing date of Menashe’s ITU application. The letter warned Menashe that if the mark Sexy Little Thing, Sexy Little Things were used, it would infringe V Secret’s mark. The letter demanded that Menashe abandon the ITU application and cease all plans to use the Sexy Little Thing, Sexy Little Things mark. V Secret’s letter requested a response by November 19, 2004, but on January 11, 2005, Menashe filed an action for declaratory judgment of noninfringement against V Secret. The parties tried their case to the court in December 2005.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Baer, J.)

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 814,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership