B & H INDUSTRIES OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC.

v.

DIETER ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

• Burger King Corp. v. Agad, 911 F. Supp. 1499 (S.D. Fla. 1995)
• Planetary Motion, Inc. v. Techplosion, Inc., 261 F.3d 1188 (11th Cir. 2001)
  …nd (7) actual confusion. See Lone Star, 122 F. 3d at 1382. Of these, the type of mark and the evidence of actual confusion are the most important. See Dieter v. B&H Indus. of Southwest Fla., Inc., 880 F. 2d 322, 326 (11th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 950, 111 S.Ct. 369, 112 L.Ed.2d 332 (1990). In this case, there is evidence that end-users subscribed to Techsplosion’s e-mail service under the impression they were subscribing to Planetary Motion’s service. See R2-46-Exh. 1-G. . The theory of "natu…
• Sunamerica Corp. v. SUN Life Assurance Co. OF Canada, 77 F.3d 1325 (11th Cir. 1996)
  …he trial court quickly found a likelihood of confusion based upon an analysis of the marks at issue. Echoing this circuit’s seven-factor test for likelihood of confusion, see Dieter v. B & H Indus., 880 F. 2d 322, 326 (11th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 950, 111 S.Ct. 369, 112 L.Ed.2d 332 (1990); Jellibeans, Inc. v. Skating Clubs, 716 F. 2d 833, 840 (11th Cir.1983), the district court ruled that there was a risk of confusion because SUN LIFE (U.S.) could be considered “synonymous” with SUN LIFE OF AMER…