Certain Electric Power Tools, Battery Cartridges, and ... - USITC

350. One-half of the respondents in Study R coming from stores sellingTrade Associates or Mark I identify the tool they view as coming fromMakita.(Sorensen, Tr. 2298-99, CPX-89C at 32). That translates to 1 outof 2 people. (Sorensen, Tr. 2299). A sample of two is not a meaningfulbase for drawing conclusions on likelihood of confusion.(Bunge, Tr.2685). In Study C, for tool C-13, 50% of the respondents making a "mightbe Makita" source identification indicated that appearance has affectedtheir choice.(CXA-89 at 77-78).That percentage represents 2 out of fourpeople. (Jacoby, Tr. 2883-2884). Dr. Jacoby estimated that at least 80%of the statistics used by Dr. Sorensen reflect such problems.(Jacoby, Tr.2884).351. No definitive conclusion can.be made from Study R, with its mullsampling of only 75 store personnel.(CPP LC266; CXA 10, Sorensen W.S.,pp. 41-42).C. m e r Confygion E v i d m352. Complainants called three witnesses to testify as to actualconfusion between respondents* tools and the Makita brand.All threeincidences of "confusion" related to Jepson tools. (FF 353-57).353. Carmen Fraser, one of the confusion witnesses, testified that shewas shown a labelled Jepson power tool by a Jepson sales clerk. (Fraser,Tr. 1402).Fraser is familiar with Jepson power tools, and is familiarwith Hakita products because she sells Hakita products. (Fraser, Tr. 1399,1404; Unopposed RPF 4352: Unopposed RPF 4357). Fraser was told that thetool was as good as a Makita, but representations were never made to Fraserthat the Jepson tool was manufactured by Makita, nor WAS the product everreferred to as a Makita product. (Fraser, Tr. 1402-03).107