2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Monsanto Co. v. Campuzano.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Monsanto Co. v. Campuzano Anchor | green | “i presume that the counterfeit items caused public confusion in the marketplace, as the counterfeit marks and the genuine marks are substantially identical both in design and use and it is undisputed that the counterfeit marks were sold to the public.” | 3 |
| 2 | Daimler AG v. A-Z Wheels LLC | green | “again, the court finds it unnecessary to analyze the likelihood of confusion test because the marks are identical.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.