Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-352_c0n2.pdf
Page Number: 11

8 

B&B HARDWARE, INC. v. HARGIS INDUSTRIES, INC. 

Opinion of the Court 

decision.  The District Court disagreed, reasoning that the 
TTAB  is  not  an  Article  III  court.    The  jury  returned  a 
verdict for Hargis, finding no likelihood of confusion.

B&B appealed to the Eighth Circuit.  Though accepting
for the sake of argument that agency decisions can ground 
issue  preclusion,  the  panel  majority  affirmed  for  three 
reasons:  first,  because  the  TTAB  uses  different  factors 
than the Eighth Circuit to evaluate likelihood of confusion;
second,  because  the  TTAB  placed  too  much  emphasis  on 
the  appearance  and  sound  of  the  two  marks;  and  third,
because  Hargis  bore  the  burden  of  persuasion  before  the
TTAB,  while  B&B  bore  it  before  the  District  Court.    716 
F. 3d  1020  (2013).  Judge  Colloton  dissented,  concluding 
that  issue  preclusion  should  apply.    After  calling  for  the 
views of the Solicitor General, we granted certiorari.  573 
U. S. ___ (2014). 

II 
The  first  question  that  we  must  address  is  whether  an
agency  decision  can  ever  ground  issue  preclusion.    The 
District  Court  rejected  issue  preclusion  because  agencies 
are  not  Article  III  courts.  The  Eighth  Circuit  did  not 
adopt that view, and, given this Court’s cases, it was right
to take that course. 

This Court has long recognized that “the determination
of  a  question  directly  involved  in  one  action  is  conclusive
as to that question in a second suit.”  Cromwell v. County 
of  Sac,  94  U. S.  351,  354  (1877).    The  idea  is  straightfor-
ward:  Once  a  court  has  decided  an  issue,  it  is  “forever 
settled  as  between  the  parties,”  Baldwin  v.  Iowa  State 
Traveling  Men’s  Assn.  283  U. S.  522,  525  (1931),  thereby 
“protect[ing]” against “the expense and vexation attending 
multiple  lawsuits,  conserv[ing]  judicial  resources,  and
foster[ing]  reliance  on  judicial  action  by  minimizing  the
possibility  of  inconsistent  verdicts,”  Montana  v.  United 
States, 440  U. S. 147, 153–154 (1979).  In short, “a losing