You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Burger King Corp. v. Pilgrim's Pride Corp.

Citations: 934 F. Supp. 425; 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12157; 1996 WL 480431Docket: 87-0610-CIV

Court: District Court, S.D. Florida; August 15, 1996; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves a trademark infringement dispute between Burger King Corporation and Pilgrim's Pride Corporation in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Burger King had previously succeeded in obtaining an accounting of profits from Pilgrim's Pride for infringing its trademark with the sale of 'Chicken Tenders.' The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision and awarded appellate attorney's fees to Burger King. Currently, the court is reviewing a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation regarding Burger King's petition for attorney's fees and Pilgrim's Pride's motion for summary judgment on damages. The Magistrate Judge advised awarding Burger King $1,259,663 in profits, $106,034.83 in attorney's fees, and $8,878.65 in costs. Pilgrim's Pride contested the recommendations, particularly the deductions for advertising and selling costs, but the court emphasized that the burden of proof for deductions lies with the defendant. The court agreed with the Magistrate Judge that only costs directly attributable to the infringing product are deductible, thereby denying the majority of Pilgrim's Pride's deductions. Following a de novo review, the court affirmed the Magistrate Judge's recommendations.

Legal Issues Addressed

Awarding Attorney's Fees and Costs

Application: The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted appellate attorney's fees to Burger King.

Reasoning: The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this ruling and granted Burger King appellate attorney's fees.

Burden of Proof on Defendant for Cost Deductions

Application: Defendant must demonstrate costs are directly related to the infringing product to qualify for deductions from gross profits.

Reasoning: Defendant must demonstrate that claimed expenses are directly related to the production and sale of the infringing product to qualify for a deduction from gross profits, as established in Maltina Corp. v. Cawy Bottling Co. Inc.

Deductions for Advertising and Selling Costs in Trademark Disputes

Application: Burger King's claim was limited to profits from infringement, while Pilgrim's Pride contested deductions for advertising expenses and selling costs, which the court largely denied in favor of Burger King.

Reasoning: Pilgrim's Pride objected to the recommendation, specifically disputing the deductions allowed for advertising expenses and the exclusion of selling costs.

Judicial Review and Affirmation of Magistrate's Recommendations

Application: The Court conducted a de novo review and affirmed the Magistrate Judge's recommendations on profit and cost awards.

Reasoning: After a de novo review, the Court affirmed the Magistrate Judge's well-reasoned Report and Recommendation.

Trademark Infringement and Profit Accounting

Application: The court awarded Burger King an accounting of profits from Pilgrim's Pride for infringing on its trademark with the sale of 'Chicken Tenders.'

Reasoning: The court had previously ruled in favor of Burger King, awarding it an accounting of Pilgrim's Pride's profits from selling a chicken product called 'Chicken Tenders,' which infringed on Burger King's trademark.