Appellant Resource Developers, Inc. ("Resource") appeals from a summary 137*137 judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Haight, J.), dismissing its claims against Dettra Flag Company ("Dettra"), asserted under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (1988), for unfair competition and dismissing its pendent state law claim against Dettra for inducing the breach of a licensing agreement between the Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation ("Foundation") and Resource. On appeal, Resource contends that the district court misapplied the law because it applied legal principles pertaining to product infringement claims instead of the legal standards for false advertising. Resource also argues that summary judgment was inappropriate because the evidence supported a finding that Dettra intentionally sought to convey the false impression that its flags were officially endorsed by the Foundation. Finally, Resource maintains that the district court erred in requiring it to prove actual consumer confusion in order to succeed in an action for money damages. Resource argues that it presented evidence of intent to deceive and therefore a showing of actual consumer confusion was unnecessary.
We reject the arguments advanced by Resource and affirm the summary judgment entered in favor of Dettra.
Miner '56, Roger J., "Resource Dev. v. Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island, 926 F. 2d 134 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 1991" (1991). Circuit Court Opinions. 306.