The opinion of the court was delivered by: NIXON
JOHN T. NIXON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Presently before the Court is the Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction and the Defendants' opposition. Both parties have submitted extensive briefs on the matter. For the following reasons, the Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction will be GRANTED.
The Plaintiff, Someday Baby, Inc., manufactures children's products which consist of a book and a related cassette recording that are sold together in one package. The present dispute concerns the "Puzzle Piece" packaging design used by the Plaintiff. In this design scheme, the plastic case containing the cassette tape fits within a window on the front of the book's package, and the artwork on the cassette case completes a larger image on the box in the same way that a jigsaw puzzle is completed by its final piece.
The Defendant JTG of Nashville, Inc., the plaintiff's exclusive distributor in the book industry, has begun selling several products of its own which utilize the puzzle piece design. The Plaintiff has sued for unfair competition under the Lanham Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1125(a), and has also asked the Court to assume pendent jurisdiction over state claims grounded in common law trademark infringement, breach of fiduciary duty, and unfair competition.
The Plaintiff has requested a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Defendant from manufacturing, marketing, selling or distributing all products which embody the "Puzzle Piece" design until the matter is resolved. Trial is scheduled for September 18, 1990.
In order to justify a preliminary injunction, the Plaintiff must show that there is a substantial likelihood that it will succeed on the merits; that a substantial threat exists that Someday Baby will suffer irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted; that the threatened injury to Someday Baby outweighs the harm that an injunction would cause JTG of Nashville; and that the granting of an injunction would serve the public interest. Mason County Medical Association v. Knebel, 563 F.2d 256, 261 (6th Cir. 1977). In addition, Someday Baby must demonstrate that it has no adequate remedy at law. Gilley v. U.S., 649 F.2d 449, 454 (6th Cir. 1981).
In order to succeed on the merits in an action under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), the Plaintiff must demonstrate:
1) that the trade dress or product configuration of the competing products is confusingly similar;
2) that the appropriated feature of the trade dress or product configuration is primarily nonfunctional; and
3) that the trade dress or product configuration has obtained secondary meaning.
Kwik-Site Corp. v. Clear View Mfg. Co., Inc., 758 F.2d 167, 178 (6th Cir. 1985), citing Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp., 728 F.2d 1423, 1445, ...