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

especially where the survey was conducted properly. m, ps1.y. Twas Motor -ne. Inc,, 628 F.2d 500 (5th Cir. 1980): &JR Foods,c. v. White Creek CorL, 603 F.2d 1058 (2d Cir. 1979).a* -In an attempt to demonstrate consumer confusion between Makita productsand the accused products, complainants introduced survey evidence ofCor&consumers (Study C) and retailers (Study R).The C surveys were conductedin the same manner as the secondary meaning survey discussed above, but theintetviewees were shown one of fourteen of the respondents' tools withoutthe logo or label masked.The logo or label of each tool was that of oneof the respondents, (FF 329, 331-32).The C survey suffers from the same flaws as the S survey as describedabove.Assuming, though, that the survey was perfect in all respects, thereported survey results do not prove that a substantial number of buyersare likely to be confused.Again, ignoring all the flaws in the survey,the reported results indicate that only 8.2% of all survey respondentsidentified a respondent tool as a Makita. (FF 333, 339).Only one toolbroke the 15% threshold.(16.6% for the cordless sander, which ran a poor4th in the S Study).Rather than indicating confusion between Makita and the surveyed tools,the results of the C study indicate that survey respondents on the wholeengaged in guessing. Black & Decker, whose tools are not in issue, holdsthe leading rhare of the overall power tool market, and (C )C1 In response to question 1 in(the C survey (company source), 29.1% gave a Black i Decker company source-identification and 17.6% listed Makita.(FF 334).In response to question23 1