Court Opinion

ID: 9443041
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:08:49.067845+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:20.809375
License: Public Domain

FRANK, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
The district judge ignored the Lanham Act. Judge Clark concludes that to make the Lanham Act applicable here, it suffices to show some injury to plaintiff’s interstate business. Whether that is enough, I do not care to consider, since there is no finding of such injury. I therefore follow the trial judge. That is, I rest my concurrence on state law alone. Because, then, on my view of the case, the Lanham Act is irrelevant, I do not join in — I neither concur in nor dissent from — that part of Judge Clark’s opinion (running from the fifth paragraph through the ninth) which discusses the meaning and scope of that statute.
SWAN, Chief Judge
(concurring).
I concur in Judge FRANK’S opinion.
I concur, to the extent indicated, in Judge CLARK’S opinion.