Use this sample of another student but change the wording (do not change the rule)
The Coca-Cola Co. v. The Koke of America
Facts About Case:
The Coca-Cola Company tried to prevent other beverage companies from using the word "Koke" for their products. The companies fought back saying that Coca-Cola had no right to help from the courts because the name was fraudulent representation because Coca-Cola's products do not include cocaine as an ingredient. The trial court granted the injunction against Koke of America, the appellate court overturned the ruling and Coca-Cola appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Issue:
Is the injunction allowed to stand against the Koke Company for using Koke in their products? Or is the Coca-Cola Company fraudulently representing its product by using "Koke" on its products? Or is there standing for the injunction against other companies using the word "Koke" in their products? Or is the Coca-Cola trademark entitled protection under the law?
Rule:
Coca-Cola probably means to most persons the plaintiff's familiar product to be had everywhere rather than a compound of particular substances.
Application:
The Coca-Cola Company publically advertised that their products do not have any cocaine in them and have no cocaine ties except for the name and the picture. The name and picture have no meaningful effect on anyone who sees it. The court decided to not deny the Coca-Cola Company help based on the fact that someone may expect cocaine in a Coca-Cola product. The standing of the injunction must be judged by the facts when the suit began not based on the facts of an earlier time.
Conclusion:
The U.S. Supreme Court decided to hold up the decision of the district court, allowing the injunction to stand.