B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc.

Facts

Hargis Industries, Inc. (Defendant), manufactured fasteners for use in the construction industry under the trade name “SEALTITE.” B&B Hardware, Inc. (Plaintiff) manufactured fasteners for use in the aerospace industry under the trade name “SEALTIGHT.” Defendant sought to register its trade name pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, through a United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) administrative process. Plaintiff opposed the registration in a proceeding before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). Thereafter, Plaintiff filed suit in federal district court against Defendant for trademark infringement. While the action was pending in district court, the TTAB held for Plaintiff, concluding that Defendant’s mark could not be registered because it too closely resembled Plaintiff’s mark and could cause confusion. Plaintiff argued in district court that Defendant could not contest the likelihood of confusion due to the preclusive effect of the TTAB’s decision. The district court disagreed, reasoning that the TTAB was not an Article III court. After a trial, a jury held for Defendant. Plaintiff appealed. The court of appeals affirmed because 1) the TTAB used different factors to evaluate likelihood of confusion; 2) the TTAB placed too much emphasis on the appearances and sounds of the two marks; and 3) Defendant had the burden of persuasion before the TTAB while Plaintiff had the burden of persuasion before the district court. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review.