Terrapin v. Krell
Case Date: 08/18/1992
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 92-1060
|
August 18, 1992 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT _____________________ No. 92-1060 TERRAPIN SOFTWARE, INC., Plaintiff, Appellee, v. KRELL SOFTWARE CORP., Defendant, Appellant. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ____________________ Before Selya, Circuit Judge, _____________ Roney,* Senior Circuit Judge, ____________________ and Pieras,** District Judge. ______________ ____________________ Thomas L. Bohan with whom Chris A. Caseiro and Thomas L. Bohan & _______________ ________________ __________________ Associates were on brief for appellant. __________ Robert S. Hark with whom Elliott L. Epstein and Isaacson & ________________ ____________________ ___________ Raymond were on brief for appellee. _______ ____________________ ____________________ _____________________ * Of the Eleventh Circuit, sitting by designation. ** Of the District of Puerto Rico, sitting by designation. Per Curiam. This is an appeal from a Maine District Court Per Curiam __________ finding of trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051-1127, with the issuance of a permanent injunction and damages in the amount of $10,750.00. The issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in determining that there was a likelihood of trademark confusion. The determination of likelihood of trademark confusion is one of fact that is to be set aside on appellate review only if clearly erroneous. Keds ____ Corp. v. Renee Int'l Trading Corp., 888 F.2d 215, 222 (1st Cir. __________________________________ 1989). We have reviewed the parties and record on appeal, and find no clear error. We affirm the judgment of the district court essentially for the reasons stated in the district court's opinion and order dated November 19, 1991. Affirmed. Affirmed. ________ 2 |