Mealey's Trademarks

  • September 16, 2020

    ICSID Finds No Evidence Panama Court's Judgment Harmed Tire Company Investment

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — An International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunal in an award issued Aug. 14 and released publicly on Sept. 4 denied two tire companies' nearly $20 million claim against the Republic of Panama after finding that there was not "a scintilla of evidence" showing that the companies' tire trademarks were harmed or lost value due to a Panama Supreme Court judgment against the companies (Bridgestone Licensing Services, Inc., et al. v. Republic of Panama, No. ARB/16/34, ICSID).

  • September 14, 2020

    6th Circuit Upholds Denial Of JMOL On Trademark Claim

    CINCINNATI — In a wide-ranging ruling issued Sept. 10, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a Michigan federal judge's denial of a copyright and trademark defendant's motion for a new trial while also affirming the judge's determination that the plaintiff in the case is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law with regard to its "CATIA" trademark (Dassault Systèmes, SA v. Keith Childress, Nos. 17-2175, -2239, -2416, 6th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28941).

  • September 14, 2020

    2nd Circuit Upholds Rejection Of Trademark Claims Against Apple

    NEW YORK — A New York federal judge did not err in granting summary judgment that Apple Inc. did not infringe the "IONEX" trademark when it adopted "Ion-X" to describe the glass face of the Apple watch, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals concluded Sept. 11 (Saxon Glass Technologies Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 19-2190, 2nd Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28946).

  • September 09, 2020

    Juul Sues In Canada To Halt Unauthorized Global Exports Of Juul Cartridges

    TORONTO — E-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc. and its affiliate Juul Labs Canada Ltd. on Aug. 5 filed a trademark infringement lawsuit in Canadian Federal Court against three individuals and two companies in Quebec that it alleges are illegally purchasing and importing Juul products, including those with flavors and high nicotine content, and then reselling or exporting the products in regions where those specific types of Juul products are unavailable or prohibited, including Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia (Juul Labs, Inc., et al. v. 2970201 Canada Inc., et al., No. T-867-20, Canada Fed.).

  • September 04, 2020

    Juul Files Wave Of Trademark Suits Against Retailers In 6 States

    Over the past month, e-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc. has filed at least 10 trademark infringement lawsuits against business owners and stores in several states that they allege are selling counterfeit and gray-market e-cigarette products misrepresented as authentic Juul products or as products intended for domestic sale in the United States (Juul Labs Inc. v. Madison Food Mart Inc., No. 20-cv-1175, N.D. Ala.; Juul Labs Inc. v. Mohammed Olabi, et al., No. 20-cv-1234, D. Conn.; Juul Labs Inc. v. Jubilee Smoke & Vape Inc., et al., No. 20-cv-6453, S.D. N.Y.; Juul Labs Inc. v. 5 Borough Market II Corp., No. 20-cv-3799, E.D. N.Y.; Juul Labs, Inc. v. Salam Murshed, No. 20-cv-868, D. N.H.; Juul Labs Inc. v. Express Novelty Inc., No. 20-cv-2602, W.D. Tenn.; Juul Labs Inc. v. Gladys Smoke Shop Inc., No. 20-cv-353, E.D. Texas; Juul Labs Inc. v. LMD Ventures Inc., No. 20-cv-984, W.D. Texas; Juul Labs Inc. v. Goody & Sons Inc., No. 20-cv-2164, N.D. Texas; Juul Labs Inc. v. Surya Maya LLC, No. 20-cv-949, N.D. Texas).

  • September 04, 2020

    9th Circuit: Court Erred In Ruling Intellectual Property Exclusion Bars Coverage

    PASADENA, Calif. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 19 held that a lower federal court erred in finding that an insurance policy's intellectual property exclusion unambiguously precluded coverage solely based on the allegations that the insured asserted in an underlying lawsuit, reversing and remanding (MyChoice Software, LLC, et al. v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America, No. 19-56030, 9th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26328).

  • September 03, 2020

    Attorney Fees Request In Trademark Case Rejected In Washington

    SEATTLE — A charter airline that one year ago prevailed on allegations that it infringed a trademarked logo was denied its bid for $272,607 in attorney fees on Sept. 1, when a federal judge in Washington found that the case was not objectively unreasonable (New Flyer Industries Canada ULC, et al. v. San Juan Airlines, No. 18-299, W.D. Wash., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159182).

  • September 03, 2020

    In Delaware Trademark Row Over 'Golo,' Injunction Denied

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A trademark dispute over apple cider vinegar gummies and diet pills with similar names will proceed without a preliminary injunction in place, a federal judge in Delaware ruled Sept. 1 (GOLO LLC v. Goli Nutrition, No. 20-667, D. Del., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158508).

  • August 28, 2020

    Belarusian Sued Over Instagram 'Fake Engagement' Business

    SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook Inc. and Instagram LLC (Facebook, collectively) filed claims for computer fraud, trademark infringement and cybersquatting against a Belarus man in California federal court on Aug. 27, claiming that the defendant operates a business where he "artificially inflate[s] the 'likes,' 'comments,' 'views,' and 'followers' of Instagram accounts" via a network of computers and bots (Facebook Inc., et al. v. Nikolay Holper, No. 20-6023, N.D. Calif.).

  • August 25, 2020

    ASU Files Trademark Infringement Suit Over Instagram 'Hoax-19' Account

    PHOENIX — An Instagram page promoting a "Hoax-19" party at Arizona State University (ASU) and calling the novel coronavirus pandemic a hoax prompted the university to file a trademark infringement complaint in Arizona federal court on Aug. 20 against a John Doe that created the Instagram account, which features ASU's trademarks, and Facebook Inc., which owns Instagram LLC (Arizona Board of Regents v. John Doe, et al., No. 20-1638, D. Ariz.).

  • August 24, 2020

    Judge Overseeing Florida Franchise Row: In-Person Trial Still Possible

    MIAMI — In an Aug. 21 docket entry styled as a "paperless order," a federal judge in Florida rejected plaintiffs' efforts to hold a trial on their allegations of breach of guaranty via videoconference in view of the COVID-19 pandemic, finding instead that an in-person trial by year's end on that claim and Lanham Act damages "is possible with social distancing protocols in place" (Tim Hortons USA Inc., et al. v. Tims Milner LLC, et al., No. 18-24152, S.D. Fla.).

  • August 19, 2020

    Divided Panel: Website, Domain Registration Not 'Express Aiming'

    SAN FRANCISCO — Dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction in a copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit over the "ePorner" website was affirmed Aug. 17 by a deeply divided Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, in a holding that spawned two concurrences and a dissent (AMA Multimedia LLC v. Marcin Wanat, No. 18-15051, 9th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26140).

  • August 17, 2020

    $21M Award For Tiffany In Trademark Row With Costco Vacated By 2nd Circuit

    NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York erred in determining that a retailer engaged in counterfeiting as a matter of law at the summary judgment stage, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 17, vacating and remanding an advisory jury's subsequent $21,010,438 award on behalf of a trademark infringement plaintiff (Tiffany and Company, et al. v. Costco Wholesale Corp., Nos. 17-2798, 19-338 and 19-404, 2nd Cir.).

  • August 14, 2020

    Operator Of 'Sugar Daddy' Website Seeks Relief From Dismissal Of Trademark Suit

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — In an Aug. 11 reply supporting its motion for reconsideration of a California federal court's dismissal of its trademark infringement against a rival website operator, a "sugar daddy" dating website owner maintains that it is entitled to relief from the dismissal, which was due to both parties' failure to comply with document filing deadlines (Reflex Media Inc., et al. v. Apiriliaco Ltd., et al., No. 8:16-cv-00795, C.D.  Calif.).

  • August 13, 2020

    10th Circuit: Similarities Lacking Between Competing Personal Organizers

    DENVER — In an Aug. 11 holding, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a Utah federal judge's grant of summary judgment in favor of two defendants accused of infringing the popular "LifePlanner" personal organizer, finding that "no reasonable juror could conclude" that a competing organizer is substantially similar (EC Design LLC v. Craft Smith LLC, et al., No. 19-4087, 10th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25342).

  • August 10, 2020

    Appellant Did Not Breach Separation Contract, Panel Says In Partial Reversal

    NEW ORLEANS — The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 7 held that a lower federal court erred in finding that a former employee of a digital marketing firm breached the terms of a separation contract but affirmed the lower court's summary judgment ruling in favor of an industry competitor as to the firm's claim for violation of California unfair competition law (UCL) and denial of the firm's motion for a new trial on its trade secret misappropriation claim (Six Dimensions Inc. v. Inc., et al., No. 19-20505, 5th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25004).

  • August 07, 2020

    9th Circuit Says Prospective Relief Possible In Trademark Row

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge erred in concluding that she was bound by the law of the case doctrine in denying a request for prospective injunctive relief in a dispute over the "Fred Segal" trademark, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 4 (Fred Segal LLC v. CormackHill LP, Nos. 18-56093, -56169, 9th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 24533).

  • August 05, 2020

    Panel Upholds Sanctions, Default Judgment By Trademark Board

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 5 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found no abuse of discretion in a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to sanction a trademark owner in a dispute over "Hollywood Beer" (Kris Kaszuba v. Andrei Iancu, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, No. 19-1547, Fed. Cir.).

  • August 03, 2020

    Appeals Court: Dispute Over Coca-Cola 'Zero' Marks Is Moot

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Disclaimer by the Coca-Cola Co. of any right to the term "Zero" in connection with its soft drinks mooted a challenge by Royal Crown Co. Inc. to 16 Coca-Cola trademark applications, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 3 (Royal Crown Company Inc. v. Coca-Cola Company, No. 19-2088, Fed. Cir.).

  • July 30, 2020

    Divided Panel:  Interest, Belief Of Damage Enough To Seek Cancellation

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A panel majority of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 27 reversed and remanded a determination by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that because a petitioner for trademark cancellation lacks a proprietary interest in an asserted unregistered mark, it lacks standing (Australian Therapeutic Supplies Pty. Ltd. v. Naked TM LLC, No. 19-1567, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23523).