In June, Peoples Federal Savings Bank (Brighton, MA) sued People’s United Bank (Bridgeport, CT) for trademark infringement. Prior to the dispute, Plaintiff had a longstanding presence in Suffolk County, MA and defendant in CT. When a third Mass. bank failed, defendant took it over and rebranded the branches, leading to the Plaintiff’s attempt to stop defendant’s use of “People’s” in plaintiff’s territory. Following a motion for preliminary injunction and emergency hearing, Judge Gorton issued an order denying the motion.
First, the court found that plaintiff’s mark was not inherently distinctive for a number of reasons including the number of other banks with a variation of “People” in their name (including four in Eastern Mass.) and the filing date of plaintiff’s trademark registration (the day the complaint was filed). The court felt the mark was descriptive, primarily because 159 other banks in the U.S. use “People” in their names. Secondary meaning was also elusive due to a lack of evidentiary support.
Second, the court went through the multi-factor test of likelihood of confusion used in the First Circuit. Among the facts relied on by the court are the differences in the party’s logos as used in commerce, no actual confusion, and no intent to cause confusion.
Peoples Federal Savings Bank v. People’s United Bank, 10-11002-NMG (D. Mass. Aug. 9, 2010)
Comments