Judges tend not to go thru a full likelihood-of-confusion analysis at 12b6 but here you are.

The Court found that the WONDERFUL packaging and Defendant’s packaging do not possess “striking similarity” (sic). The Court notes that while their were similarities . . .

The handling of the third factor, channels of trade was a bit

Has Solid 21 achieved secondary meaning in term RED GOLD, a form of gold with high copper content, used for luxury watches. Whether Richemont used the term descriptively will be question for jury, summary judgment denied.

https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2023/06/RED-GOLD-solid-21-v-richemont-sdny-decision.pdf

California water bottle company sues unknown entities for merging, manipulating, altering, and “hijacking” plaintiff’s product listings and consumer reviews causing them to be associated with defendants’ products instead.” There is a Section 43(a) claim that alleges confusion as to origin, but plaintiff doesn’t appear to allege ownership of a trademark. The complaint alleges that “misappropriated”