LAS VEGAS — In a 56-page ruling issued Jan. 12, a federal judge in Nevada said Rimini Street Inc. violated the terms of a permanent injunction barring it from ongoing infringement of Oracle USA Inc. copyrights, entitling Oracle to an award of $630,000 in sanctions.
MIAMI — In a final default judgment and permanent injunction issued Jan. 11, a federal judge in Florida ordered myriad defendants to pay a plaintiff that makes and sells bowls and mugs developed by a young child with dyslexia more than $3.9 million in connection with their sale of counterfeit goods.
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Jan. 10 granted dismissal of allegations of trademark infringement and dilution by the maker of “XO” cognac but said related claims of design patent infringement will proceed.
BOSTON — A Massachusetts appeals panel on Jan. 6 held that although underlying counterclaims against insureds do not explicitly state a claim for slander or libel, they are “reasonably susceptible of an interpretation that states or roughly sketches” a defamation claim, vacating a lower court’s ruling that the underlying counterclaims fail to allege a personal and advertising injury to trigger insurance coverage and remanding.
SAN FRANCISCO — Arizona State University (ASU) filed an opening brief in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Dec. 16, arguing that a trial court erred in dismissing sua sponte its trademark and trade dress claims over a fake Instagram account that was started by a John Doe, arguing that it presented prima facie evidence that the account, which flouted university rules pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic, used the university’s trademarks in a manner that was confusing to the public.
PHILADELPHIA — The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 5 held that the manufacturer and marketer of a vitamin energy shot has carried its “light” burden to establish that its insurer has a duty to defend it against an underlying false advertising lawsuit brought by a competitor, vacating and remanding a lower federal court’s ruling in favor of the insurer.
ORLANDO, Fla. — A federal judge in Florida on Jan. 5 refused to modify the terms of a global permanent injunction to allow defendants to use the “Commodores” trademark within the European Union (EU).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Allegations of infringement leveled over the “San Diego Employment Law Group” trademark were transferred Jan. 4 to California federal court by a District of Columbia federal judge, who reserved judgment on a defendant’s motion to dismiss “with the intention that the motion will be ripe for decision by the transferee court.”
DALLAS — In a Dec. 29 order a federal magistrate judge in Texas said factual questions over the validity of “Transparent Energy” as a trademark preclude awarding summary judgment to a defendant accused of infringement.
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — Allegations of infringement leveled in connection with “Weigh to Live” and “Weigh to Wellness” were dismissed with prejudice on Dec. 29 by a federal magistrate judge in Alabama, on grounds that consumers were not likely to be confused by the competing trademarks.
NEW YORK — In an order issued Dec. 21, a federal judge in New York granted the city of New York a preliminary injunction barring a cannabis retailer from using logos that are confusingly similar to city trademarks.
NEW YORK — In a Dec. 21 summary order, a panel of the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals transferred to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals a challenge by a defendant to a preliminary injunction barring him from selling alleged counterfeit lighting designs.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board did not err in turning away opposition to an application to register the “Sky Cinemas” trademark because it is unlikely that consumers would be confused between “Sky Cinemas” and various other trademarks for “Sky,” the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Dec. 17.
ST. LOUIS — In a Dec. 7 filing in Missouri federal court, a plaintiff who was recently awarded $11.75 million by jurors on its allegation that Mast-Jägermeister US Inc. (Jägermeister) violated Missouri franchise law when it terminated a distribution agreement without good cause moved for an award of $3.4 million in attorney fees, arguing that “there can be no dispute” that it is the prevailing party in the case.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 13 declined to weigh in on the application of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) in a dispute between France and the former owner of the France.com internet domain, letting stand a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that found the country immune from cybersquatting and trademark infringement claims against it.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court denied its petition for certiorari in a case centering on trade dress functionality and protectability, the maker of Pocky snacks filed a petition for rehearing on Nov. 23, arguing that a pending certiorari petition in another lawsuit asks essentially the same question and will likely have an impact on a ruling by the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in the present case.
SAN FRANCISCO — Allegations of trademark infringement leveled in connection with the use of “W*nder” for carbonated beverages infused with cannabis additives will proceed without a preliminary injunction in place, a federal judge in California ruled Dec. 6.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Nov. 5 amicus curiae brief, the government of the Commonwealth of Australia asked the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari to an Australian company that was found to have infringed the “Uggs” trademark, arguing that a trial court did not properly apply the doctrine of foreign equivalents when considering the trademark, which is a generic term in Australia.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A denial by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of a petition to cancel two “Money Mart” registrations was reversed and remanded Nov. 24 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which found that the board’s determination of priority was erroneous.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Nov. 22 reply brief supporting its petition for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, the former owner of the France.com domain faults the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for using the wrong actual harm criteria in reaching its conclusion that the gravamen of its complaint against France was a French court’s ruling transferring ownership of the domain rather than trademark infringement.