The district court ruled that what A&F described as its distinctive trade dress was (in the words of the appellate court) "too generic and descriptive" to warrant protection under the Lanham Act. A&F appealed this judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which again ruled for American Eagle. The court stated that "Abercrombie's clothing designs and in-store presentations are legally functional non-protectable trade dress and that Abercrombie could not possibly have carried its burden of proving that American's catalog was confusingly similar to what we have presumed is the protectable trade dress of Abercrombie's "Quarterly"."