Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca6-16-01007/USCOURTS-ca6-16-01007-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau
Appellee
Detroit Sports Commission
Appellee
Mark Kassa
Appellant

Document Text:

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION

File Name: 17a0024n.06

No. 16-1007

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

MARK KASSA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

DETROIT METRO CONVENTION & VISITORS 

BUREAU; DETROIT SPORTS COMMISSION,

Defendants-Appellees.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT 

COURT FOR THE EASTERN 

DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

BEFORE: KEITH, BATCHELDER, and CLAY, Circuit Judges.

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. Mark Kassa appeals the district court’s 

order dismissing, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), his First Amended 

Complaint alleging claims for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, false designation of 

origin, and unfair competition. Kassa, a Detroit-based “musician and entrepreneur,” holds valid

trademarks to the phrase “Welcome to the D” for use on clothing, in live musical performances, 

and in connection with other entertainment programming. For example, he hosts the “Welcome 

to the D” talk show on YouTube1and maintains an online store that sells apparel and accessories 

“related to Detroit and music.” In his complaint, he alleges that the Detroit Metro Convention & 

Visitors Bureau (the “Bureau”) and the Detroit Sports Commission (the “Commission”)

infringed on his trademark by using the phrase “Welcome to the D” on banners and signs hung 

 

1 His YouTube channel has 163 subscribers. Its last episode was uploaded on April 2, 2015. See Welcome 

to the D Show, YOUTUBE, https://www.youtube.com/user/WelcomeToTheDshow (last visited Dec. 16, 2016).

 Case: 16-1007 Document: 32-1 Filed: 01/12/2017 Page: 1
No. 16-1007

Kassa v. Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau

-2-

around Detroit “to promote” the 2012 World Series and again for the 2015 Volleyball Open 

National Championships. This alleged infringement, he claims, caused confusion to customers 

and diluted the distinctiveness of his trademark. Applying our case law, the district court found 

that the Bureau and the Commission did not use the phrase in a trademark way, because it was a 

greeting and because “The D” is a common nickname for Detroit. The district court correctly 

applied the law, so we affirm its order.

We review de novo the dismissal of a complaint under Rule 12(b)(6). See Hensley Mfg. 

v. ProPride, Inc., 579 F.3d 603, 608–09 (6th Cir. 2009). To survive a motion to dismiss, the 

complaint must allege “facts that, if accepted as true, are sufficient ‘to raise a right to relief 

above the speculative level,’ and to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. at 

609 (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). We accept “all wellpleaded factual allegations in the complaint as true,” id., but we need not accept legal 

conclusions “couched as a factual allegation.” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).

A claim for trademark infringement requires factual allegations that establish three 

elements: (1) that the plaintiff owns the registered trademark; (2) that the defendant used the 

mark in commerce; and (3) that the allegedly infringing use was likely to cause confusion. See 

Hensley, 579 F.3d at 609. The third element is the “touchstone of liability,” but before we weigh 

various factors demonstrating a likelihood of confusion, we first determine “whether the 

defendants ‘are using the challenged mark in a way that identifies the source of their goods.’” 

Id. at 610 (quoting Interactive Prods. Corp. v. a2z Mobile Office Solutions, Inc., 326 F.3d 687, 

694 (6th Cir. 2003)). If not, then the analysis is over, because the mark is being used “in a nontrademark way,” and trademark infringement laws do not apply. Id. (citation omitted).

 Case: 16-1007 Document: 32-1 Filed: 01/12/2017 Page: 2
No. 16-1007

Kassa v. Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau

-3-

The district court properly found that the Bureau and the Commission did not use 

“Welcome to the D” as a trademark. In Hensley, we found that the allegedly infringing 

trademark did “not identify [the plaintiff] as the source of [the products]” or “suggest any current 

association” between the plaintiff and the defendant. Id. at 611. The same principle controls 

here. Even when we take Kassa’s pleaded facts as true, the allegations do not support a claim 

that the Bureau and the Commission used “Welcome to the D” to indicate the source of any good 

or service.

“The D” is a common nickname for Detroit. The words “Welcome to the D” at the top of 

banners advertising major sporting events in Detroit are simply a greeting, welcoming visitors to 

the city using its common nickname. In other words, it is a geographic identifier, not an 

identifier of the source of goods or services. The phrase does not advertise any goods or 

services, does not identify Kassa as the source of the World Series or the volleyball 

championship, and does not suggest any association between those events and Kassa. Nor does 

he allege that the Bureau and the Commission sold merchandise bearing the mark or used it in 

any other way than on its banners and signs around the city and in local media. This use was a 

non-trademark use. Kassa’s allegation that the “goods and services being offered . . . bear an 

identical name as Plaintiff’s and also constitute a reproduction or imitation thereof which causes 

confusion to customers,” has no factual support and therefore is a mere conclusion to which we 

do not assign any assumption of truth. See Hensley, 579 F.3d at 611 (“Although Hensley 

Manufacturing alleges that this creates ‘a strong likelihood of confusion in the marketplace as to 

the source of origin and sponsorship of the goods of the Plaintiff and the Defendant,’ such a 

conclusory and ‘formulaic recitation’ of the elements of a trademark infringement cause of 

action is insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.”).

 Case: 16-1007 Document: 32-1 Filed: 01/12/2017 Page: 3
No. 16-1007

Kassa v. Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau

-4-

As the district court aptly noted, viewing the banners and signs in their entirety only 

strengthens this conclusion. First, the banners contain the logos of various other entities, 

including the Bureau and the Commission, the World Series, the Detroit Tigers, and USA 

Volleyball. Second, the phrase “Welcome to the D” must be read in conjunction with the other

portion of the phrase that appears on the banner in the same font, “Where Champions are Made 

and Championships are Played.” This second half is an adjectival clause modifying “the D.” 

And in this context, “the D” on the banners and signs must mean Detroit, because that is a place 

where the players who become champions and the championships in which the people play can 

be found. Kassa’s YouTube show, music, and t-shirts simply are not a place “Where Champions 

are Made and Championships are Played.” Perhaps Kassa discusses Detroit’s champions and 

championship attempts on his show, but he has not alleged that here. Viewing the banner in its 

entirety—including its grammatical structure—further demonstrates the non-trademark use of 

the phrase.

Finally, Kassa’s argument that Hensley imposes an improper pre-pleading requirement is 

meritless. He argues that this rule “requires the court to evaluate the sufficiency of some parts of 

the allegations” and “to make a prima facie case for trademark use . . . rather than accept that 

(wrongful) trademark use has occurred.” But accepting well-pled assertions—and not legal 

conclusions2—as true and evaluating whether they state a plausible claim for relief is the point of 

a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Similarly, the court 

cannot “accept” that a misuse occurred, as that is a conclusion not entitled to the presumption of 

truth. See id. at 681. The Hensley rule does not impose a “pre-pleading requirement.” Rather, it 

lays out the elements that a plaintiff must adequately plead in order to state a claim for trademark 

 

2

For example, Kassa’s allegation that his trademark is “a well-known mark for all relevant purposes of 

trademark law” is a legal conclusion asserted as a fact. We need not and do not accept such assertions for purposes 

of this appeal.

 Case: 16-1007 Document: 32-1 Filed: 01/12/2017 Page: 4
No. 16-1007

Kassa v. Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau

-5-

infringement and “to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at

555. Kassa has alleged no facts that are sufficient to establish that the Bureau’s and the 

Commission’s use of “Welcome to the D” is likely to establish any confusion with his 

trademarked uses. He has failed to state a claim, so the district court properly dismissed his 

complaint.

Because we find that Kassa has failed to state a claim, we need not reach the Bureau’s

and the Commission’s fair use defense. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgement of the district 

court.

 Case: 16-1007 Document: 32-1 Filed: 01/12/2017 Page: 5