News & Analysis as of

Lanham Act Likelihood of Confusion Appeals

McDermott Will & Emery

RAW Confusion? No Error Where Trial Court Declines to Clarify Agreed Jury Instruction

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s jury verdict that found trade dress infringement and liability under state deceptive practices law, and the court’s order entering a nationwide...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

Fourth Circuit Confirms: Physical Distance Does Not Avoid Trademark Confusion

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a decision confirming that using similar names for businesses in the same industry can result in a likelihood of confusion despite the physical distance of the entities. In...more

Knobbe Martens

Fireball Frenzy: When First Registering a Mark, Genericness of a Mark Is Determined at the Time of Registration

Knobbe Martens on

BULLSHINE DISTILLERY LLC v. SAZERAC BRANDS, LLC - Before Moore, Reyna and Taranto. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. In assessing genericness, the TTAB considers how the mark was understood at the time of...more

Irwin IP LLP

Your “Chicken Scratch” May Be Confusing 

Irwin IP LLP on

In Re R.S. Lipman Brewing Co., LLC, 2025 WL 1099603 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 14, 2025) - Be careful when selecting a name for your product, otherwise you might find yourself cooked at the United States Patent and Trademark Office...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Opposers Beware: Your Own Mark May Not Be Protectable

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board’s dismissal of an opposition to the registration of the marks IVOTERS and IVOTERS.COM while also noting that the US Patent &...more

McDermott Will & Emery

When Analyzing Likelihood of Confusion, It’s Not Just Location, Location, Location

The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit vacated a district court’s decision finding no infringement that focused on only the geographic distance between the physical locations of the two users without considering the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Zone of Natural Expansion Is a Shield, Not a Sword

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a Trademark Trial & Appeal Board decision to partially cancel trademarks, ruling that an opposition challenger could not use the zone of natural expansion doctrine to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Bull: Historically Generic Term Can Become Non-Generic

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed Trademark Trial & Appeal Board rulings, finding that a previously generic term was not generic at the time registration was sought because at that time the mark, as...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Lager Than Life: $56 Million Verdict in Beer Trademark Dispute Still on Tap

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a $56 million trial verdict in a trademark dispute, finding that the evidence supported the jury’s conclusion that a beer company’s rebranding of one its beers infringed a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

David-Versus-Goliath Trademark Victory Isn’t “Exceptional”

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated an award of attorneys’ fees for reanalysis, explaining that the district court’s finding that the case was “exceptional” under the Lanham Act was based on policy...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Smart Choice: Survey Design Didn’t Render Survey Unreliable

McDermott Will & Emery on

Underscoring its faith in a jury’s competency to use its “common sense and experience” in evaluating evidence, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s judgment in favor of the defendants in a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

What Makes a Trademark Case “Exceptional” in the Fifth Circuit?

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a senior party mark but found that the district court committed clear error in finding that a similar junior party mark was valid. The Fifth Circuit also found that the...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Wavy Baby’s Shoes Not Entitled to Special First Amendment Protections

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

40 years ago, I was the new kid in 6th grade – truly a terrible age in a young girl’s life to try and “fit in” at a new elementary school in a small town. But, one of my best memories from that year was procuring my first...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Just How Similar Must Competing Marks Be to Survive Dismissal?

McDermott Will & Emery on

After a de novo review, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part a district court’s motion to dismiss, finding the competing marks sufficiently similar to avoid dismissal, and the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Disgorgement of Profits Appropriate Remedy for Breach of Contract, Trademark Infringement

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a trademark infringement and breach of contract case involving real estate companies with a shared name, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the trademark owner, including...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Lanham Act Liability May Apply to Copyrighted Material

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that liability under the Copyright Act and liability under the Lanham Act are not mutually exclusive and that liability under the Copyright Act does not negate trade dress...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Wild and Untamed Trademarks: Madrid Protocol Grants Right of Priority as of Constructive Use Date

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing for the first time the question of enforceability of a priority of right in a trademark granted pursuant to the Madrid Protocol where the registrant’s actual use in commerce began after the allegedly infringing...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Greek God or Continent? Defining “Confusing Similarity” under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act

Examining whether a registered mark and a domain name were confusingly similar under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Texas Hammer Nails Trademark Infringement Appeal

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal of an initial confusion trademark complaint, finding that the plaintiff alleged a plausible claim of trademark infringement under the Lanham...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Initial Confusion? Relax, Eighth Circuit Has Your Number

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing a novel issue regarding when confusion must occur for it to be actionable, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit concluded that initial-interest confusion was a viable infringement theory. Select Comfort...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Triple Trouble: Unauthorized Trademark Use among Organizations with Nearly Identical Name

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that the use of nearly identical marks by a military order, a related foundation and a funding organization was likely to cause...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

9th Circuit: Counterfeiting Claim Requires Court to Evaluate Likelihood of Confusion by Comparing Products as a Whole, Not Just...

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Does the Lanham Act require a plaintiff to show a likelihood of confusion to prevail on a counterfeiting claim? And if so, should the court simply compare the marks at issue, or look beyond them to the products themselves and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Eye Don’t: No Counterfeiting Without Likelihood of Confusion

McDermott Will & Emery on

Referring to the act of counterfeiting as “hard core” or “first degree” trademark infringement, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for the first time confirmed that the Lanham Act requires a likelihood of confusion...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Jury Trial for Trademark Infringement Claims

McDermott Will & Emery on

In finding a fair use defense and no “likelihood of confusion” in a cosmetics trademark infringement dispute, the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit also considered, as an issue of first impression, whether the Seventh...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Eagle Eye on Attorneys’ Fee Award: Courts Must Apportion Award Based on Successful Claims

Addressing the standard of review for attorneys’ fee awards under the Lanham Act, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit applied Highmark’s abuse-of-discretion standard, affirmed the district court’s exceptional-case...more

34 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide