## Facts

- A French municipality associated with long-standing production of sheep’s-milk blue-mold cheese cured in local limestone caves held a U.S.-registered certification mark, “Roquefort,” for cheese under Lanham Act § 4 (15 U.S.C. § 1054).
- Under French law, cheese could not be sold as “Roquefort” unless made within the municipality and certified by it.
- The defendant, a New York importer and seller of cheese, imported sheep’s-milk blue-mold cheese produced in Hungary and Italy.
- The imported cheese initially bore labels stating “Product of Hungary” or “Product of Italy.”
- When repackaging for U.S. sale, the defendant replaced the origin labels with labels reading “Imported Roquefort Cheese,” without disclosing the actual country of origin.
- Plaintiffs sued for infringement of the registered certification mark and asserted additional theories (treaty-based claim, unfair competition, and false designation of origin), indicating they would withdraw the other claims if they prevailed on the certification-mark claim.
- The district court granted summary judgment for plaintiffs on the certification-mark claim and entered a permanent injunction; the remaining claims were treated as withdrawn.

## Issues

1. Whether a U.S.-registered certification mark consisting of a geographic term (“Roquefort”) is valid and enforceable to prevent use of that term on cheese not produced and certified in the specified region.
2. Whether labeling Hungarian and Italian cheese as “Imported Roquefort Cheese,” without disclosing true origin, infringed the “Roquefort” certification mark.
3. Whether summary judgment and a permanent injunction were proper on the undisputed record.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment and permanent injunction.
- The court held the “Roquefort” certification mark valid and enforceable under Lanham Act § 4.
- The court held the defendant’s use of “Imported Roquefort Cheese” on non-certified cheese, without stating true origin, infringed the certification mark.
- The court upheld summary judgment and injunctive relief because the material facts concerning registration and labeling were not genuinely disputed.

## Legal Principles

- A geographic designation may be registered and protected as a certification mark under Lanham Act § 4 when it certifies geographic origin and associated standards.
- A certification mark signifies that goods meet certified characteristics (including geographic origin and production conditions) rather than indicating a single commercial source.
- Use of a certification mark on goods that do not meet the certified geographic and quality conditions constitutes infringement, particularly where labeling is likely to mislead purchasers about origin or certification.
- Summary judgment is appropriate where material facts are undisputed and the dispute concerns the legal effect of the defendant’s labeling in light of a valid registered certification mark.
- Injunctive relief is an appropriate remedy to stop continued misuse of a certification mark.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit enforced a registered geographic certification mark for “Roquefort” cheese, holding that a U.S. importer infringed by marketing non-certified Hungarian and Italian cheese as “Imported Roquefort Cheese” without disclosing true origin, and it affirmed summary judgment and a permanent injunction.


Community of Roquefort v. William Faehndrich, Inc., 303 F.2d 494 (2d Cir. 1962)