United States District Court, E.D. Missouri
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
L. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for
Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 4). After reviewing the
Verified Complaint, Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
and the Memorandum in Support thereof, and having heard the
arguments of counsel and being fully advised in the premises,
the Court hereby denies Temporary Restraining Order as
Plaintiff Rawlings Sporting Goods Company, Inc.
("Rawlings") is a leading manufacturer and marketer
of sporting goods, including baseball bats, in the United
States. In 2009, Rawlings introduced a series of high-end
baseball bats under the distinctive trademark
Defendant Easton Diamond Sports, LLC ("Easton" or
"Defendant"), a leading manufacturer of baseball
and softball equipment, is introducing a baseball bat for its
2018 line with the model "SI50." Easton's SI50
is a relatively "low-end" model, meant to provide a
cheaper alternative to other bats.
Rawlings argues that Easton's use of the designation
"SI50" on its baseball bats is likely to cause
confusion and mistake and will dilute the distinctive quality
of Rawlings's "5150" trademark in violation of
state and federal law.
"The Lanham Act prohibits the unauthorized use of
another's registered trademark without the
registrant's consent in a manner that is 'likely to
cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
deceive.'" Buffalo Wild Wings Int'l, Inc. v.
Grand Canyon Equity Partners, LLC, 829 F.Supp.2d 836,
842 (D. Minn. 2011) (citing 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)(a)).
Such unauthorized use gives rise to liability and may be
enjoined. Id. § 1116(a).
Eighth Circuit has consistently used the following six
factors, sometimes referred to as the "SquirtCo
factors, " to evaluate the likelihood of confusion in
(1) the strength of the owner's mark;
(2) the similarity of the owner's mark and the alleged
(3) the degree to which the products compete with each other;
(4) the alleged infringer's intent to "pass off its
goods as those of the trademark owner;
(5) incidents of actual confusion; and
(6) the type of product, its costs, and conditions of