The Fourth Circuit recently ruled on several important issues regarding the scope of relief that may be granted for trademark infringement. The backdrop for the decision in Georgia Pacific Consumer Products LP v. Von Drehle...more
The Supreme Court issued its second trademark ruling of the term on Tuesday, ruling that federal court decisions on “likelihood of confusion” sometimes can be precluded by earlier rulings about trademark registrability issued...more
The Supreme Court issued its second trademark ruling of the term on Tuesday, ruling that federal court decisions on “likelihood of confusion” sometimes can be precluded by earlier rulings about trademark registrability issued...more
The Second Circuit ruled last week in favor of Plaintiff Marcel Fashion Group Inc. (“Marcel”), vacating the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. (“Lucky Brand”), which had...more
In Couture v. Playdom, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the use of a mark on a website to offer services is not use in commerce sufficient to support an actual-use service mark application. As a result, the Court affirmed...more
On February 28, 2015, the Southern District of New York denied a motion to exclude the testimony and survey of an expert witness regarding whether a trademark was descriptive or suggestive. In Rise-N-Shine, LLC v. Robin...more
On February 28, 2015, the Southern District of New York denied a motion to exclude the testimony and survey of an expert witness regarding whether a trademark was descriptive or suggestive. In Rise-N-Shine, LLC v. Robin...more
In Couture v. Playdom, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the use of a mark on a website to offer services is not use in commerce sufficient to support an actual-use service mark application. As a result, the Court affirmed...more
In trademark law, rights in a trademark are determined by the date of the mark’s first use in commerce, and the party who first uses the mark in commerce has priority over other users. Under the doctrine of "tacking," under...more
In Ferring B.V. v. Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC, the Eastern District of New York was called upon to determine the importance of the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (“TMEP”)...more
It has been the practice of some brand owners to include more goods in a use-based trademark application or declaration than were actually being used. Under TTAB precedent such as Medinol v. Neuro Vasx, Inc., 67 USPQ2d 1205,...more
In American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc. (June 25, 2014), the Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit’s denial of a preliminary injunction against Aereo, finding Aereo liable for direct copyright infringement...more
On July 1, 2014, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Eighth Circuit’s decision in the case B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis, Inc. (2013). B&B Hardware owns a registered mark for SEALTIGHT for self-sealing nuts and...more
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court in POM Wonderful LLC v. The Coca Cola Co. (June 12, 2014) held that the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) does not preclude a private party from bringing a Lanham Act claim...more
In Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (March 25, 2014), the Supreme Court unanimously held that "to invoke the Lanham Act’s cause of action for false advertising, a plaintiff must plead (and ultimately...more
On July 29, 2014, the Second Circuit decided a Lanham Act false advertising case that clarified the circuit’s jurisprudence on demonstrating consumer confusion and competitive injury. In Merck Eprova AG v. Gnosis S.P.A. and...more