preview

Harley-Davidson, Inc. V Grottanelli

Decent Essays

Running head: Harley-Davidson, Inc. v Grottanelli

Harley-Davidson, Inc. v Grottanelli
Park University

HARLEY-DAVIDSON, INC. v. GROTTANELLI
91 F.Supp.2d 544 (2000)
HARLEY-DAVIDSON, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
Ronald GROTTANELLI, d/b/a The Hog Farm, Defendant.
No. 93-CV-144M.
United States District Court, W.D. New York.
March 24, 2000.
Michael, Best & Friedrich, Dyann L. Kostello, Milwaukee, WI, for plaintiff.
Phillips, Lytle, Hitchcock, Blaine & Huber, Peter K. Sommer, Buffalo, NY, for defendant.

Harley-Davidson, Inc. v Grottanelli
Harley-Davidson, Inc. v Grottanelli was heard before the court in October 21 through 24, 1996. A decision and order was entered March 20, 1997 in which it was found that the defendant was …show more content…

See Genesee Brewing, supra, at 150. (Harley-Davidson, Inc. v. Grottanelli, 2000).
It was found that the mere use of the work “hog,” regardless of how it is displayed, cannot be said to be a cause of customer confusion, unless the defendant uses the term in conjunction with the name “Harley-Davidson” or other Harley-Davidson trademarks.

*
Bibliography
Harley-Davidson, Inc. v. Grottanelli, 93-CV-144M (United States District Court March 24, 2000).
Certiorari. (2012, September 24). Retrieved from techlawjournal.com: http://www.techlawjournal.com/glossary/legal/certiorari.htm

Get Access