'Fame' is Not All-Or-Nothing

June 06, 2017
Post by Blog Staff

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) vacated a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) denying a petition by Joseph Phelps Vineyards, LLC for cancellation of a trademark held by Fairmont Holdings, LLC. The CAFC held that the Board used an incorrect standard when analyzing the ‘fame’ factor for likelihood of confusion. The court remanded for redetermination using the correct legal analysis.

The Board denied Vineyard’s petition stating that, despite success in the marketplace, it was not persuaded that their mark was a famous one, entirely discounting the ‘fame’ factor. The CAFC found that categorizing ‘fame’ as an all-or-nothing factor was incorrect and the Board should have applied the totality of the circumstances standard, considering all the relevant factors on a sliding scale. Fame is to be determined from the viewpoint of consumers of like products and necessitates reasonable weight, on an appropriate spectrum.

‘Fame’ is the fifth du Pont factor used to analyze likelihood of confusion regarding trademark infringement. Marks deemed ‘famous’ are often considered to weigh in favor of confusion, and therefore legal protection, as consumers are more likely to have an association with, or certain expectations regarding, products with that mark. 

A concurring opinion called attention to two additional issues to be considered on remand. First, the Board was incomplete in its analysis of ‘relatedness’ as it did not consider all aspects of this factor. Since ‘relatedness’ may be exhibited by complimentary products, it should also not be considered all-or-nothing, but evaluated on a sliding scale. Second, the Board did not properly consider Fairmont’s actual use of its mark, stating the appearance and format should be given appropriate weight. The intent of reassessment of these two issues is to provide increased consistency in the Board’s rulings.

For more information or if you have questions, please contact one of our MVS IP attorneys or call us at (515) 288-3667.

Post Categories

Comments (0)
Post a Comment

Captcha Image
Return to the Filewrapper Blog

Search Posts


The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.


McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.