[1] Writing for a majority of the court, Justice Byron White concluded that trade dress is inherently distinctive under the Lanham Act and that plaintiffs are not required to prove secondary meaning in suits to protect their trademark.

[11] Writing for the majority of the Court, Justice Byron White held that a distinctive trade dress is generally entitled to protection under the Lanham Act because users of a trade dress "should be able to maintain what competitive position it has and continue to seek wider identification among potential customers.

"[12] Justice White noted that trade dresses, "even if not registered, remain inherently capable of distinguishing the goods of the users of these marks.

"[13] Additionally, a business owner that copies a trade dress "may be seen as falsely claiming that his products may for some reason be thought of as originating from the plaintiff.

[17] In November 1992, Taco Cabana filed another lawsuit against Two Pesos seeking $5 million in damages for not complying with the Supreme Court's ruling and for creating further confusion among customers.