Levi Strauss & Co. v. Blue Bell, Inc.

Good Law
632 F.2d 817·208 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 713·1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 12345
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 13, 198078-3119California2,082 words

Opinion

Opinion

Markey, J.

Blue Bell, Inc. (Wrangler) appeals from a final judgment of the District Court for the Northern District of California in this suit for trademark infringement and unfair competition brought by Levi Strauss & Co. (Strauss). We affirm.

Background

In 1936, Chris Lucier, a Strauss employee, conceived the idea of a permanent identifier for pants, visible while the pants were being worn. The permanent identifier was a folded ribbon sewn with its ends captured in the seam of a rear patch pocket. For convenience, the identifier is here called the “pocket tab”.

Strauss adopted and used the pocket tab as a trademark in 1936. Over the ensuing 44 years, it has continuously and widely used the mark, most often in this form:

[[Image here]]

Strauss has obtained and maintained six federal trademark registrations covering its pocket tab, and has an application pending for a seventh registration.

In 1969, Wrangler introduced its HONDO pants line, featuring an inset (as opposed to patch) back pocket. A horizontally disposed, projecting label sewn to the pocket at its top, carried “HONDO”. Strauss complained to Wrangler that use of that label infringed its trademark rights. Wrangler disagreed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.