Mealey's Trademarks

  • February 20, 2019

    Oral Arguments Held In Dispute Over Bankruptcy Filing, Trademark License

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — An attorney told the U.S. Supreme Court at oral arguments on Feb. 20 that his client did not violate the Bankruptcy Code when it stripped a former licensee of the right to continue use of a trademark following a voluntary petition under Chapter 11 (Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology LLC, No. 17-1657, U.S. Sup.).

  • February 13, 2019

    Candle Maker Alleges Company Stole Marks, Sues For Infringement, UCL Violations

    LOS ANGELES — A candle maker on Feb. 11 sued another candle company in a California federal court, asserting claims for copyright and trademark infringement and violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), alleging that the company made and sold candles using its artwork and federally registered proprietary names (Indio Products, Inc. v. CSP Yemaya International, Inc., et al., No. 2:19cv1018, C.D. Calif.).

  • February 12, 2019

    Jurisdictional Discovery Ordered In Lanham Suit Over Online Beauty Products Sales

    HOUSTON — Adopting a magistrate’s recommendation, a Texas federal judge on Feb. 7 denied an online retailer’s motion to dismiss a Lanham Act lawsuit over its alleged sale of counterfeit goods for lack of jurisdiction, finding that good cause exists to conduct limited discovery as to whether Texas jurisdiction is proper (Danny Huynh v. Zurno Inc., No. 4:18-cv-01756, S.D. Texas, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20360).

  • February 12, 2019

    Contempt Proceeding Against Insured Does Not Allege Covered ‘Damages,’ Judge Says

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California federal judge on Feb. 7 held that an underlying contempt proceeding against an insured fails to assert a claim for covered "damages" under a general liability insurance policy, further finding that the policy’s intellectual property and unfair competition exclusions also bar coverage (Great American E&S Insurance Company v. Theos Medical Systems, Inc., No. 17-05660, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21143).

  • February 12, 2019

    Bankruptcy Did Not Permit Trademark License Rejection, Licensee Tells High Court

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — With scheduled Feb. 20 oral arguments fast approaching in a dispute over whether the U.S. Bankruptcy Code permits a trademark licensor to reject a license upon filing for bankruptcy, a former licensee tells the U.S. Supreme Court in its Feb. 8 reply brief that statutory and congressional context demonstrate that the license remained in effect after the filing (Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology LLC, No. 17-1657, U.S. Sup.).

  • February 11, 2019

    Sheet Metal Workers’ Union Says Debtor Ignores Trademark Infringement Claims

    TRENTON, N.J. — A labor union on Feb. 6 objected to the confirmation of the reorganization plan for Chapter 11 debtor Duro Dyne National Corp., telling a New Jersey federal bankruptcy court that the plan fails to address the union’s $7.6 million proof of claim for the company’s alleged infringement and counterfeiting of the union’s trademark on doors it manufactured (In re:  Duro Dyne National Corp., et al., No. 18-27963, D. N.J. Bkcy.).

  • February 08, 2019

    Lanham Act Claims Over Online Supplement Review Lack Specificity, Judge Says

    SAN DIEGO — Although a California federal judge found that a dietary supplement maker sufficiently pleaded injury from purportedly false statements made by a competitor in an online review about its product, the plaintiff’s failure to establish the statements’ falsity ultimately led the judge to dismiss its Lanham Act and trade libel claims Feb. 5 (GOLO LLC v. Higher Health Network LLC, et al., No. 3:18-cv-02434, S.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18506).

  • February 07, 2019

    Costs, But No Fees, Awarded In South Carolina Trademark Case

    CHARLESTON, S.C. — In a Feb. 5 ruling, a South Carolina federal judge rejected a prevailing trademark infringement plaintiff’s request for reimbursement of $237,824 in attorney fees, upon disagreeing with the plaintiff that the case qualifies as exceptional (SafeRack LLC v. Bullard Company, No. 17-1613, D. S.C., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18253).

  • February 06, 2019

    Chanel Granted Default Judgment Over Websites Selling Counterfeit Items

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — Chanel Inc. prevailed against the operators of several dozen websites that were offering counterfeit Chanel goods on Feb. 5, when a Florida federal judge granted its motion for default judgment and awarded it damages, injunctive relief and control over the offending websites (Chanel Inc. v. Bestaaachanel.com, et al., No. 0:18-cv-63018, S.D. Fla., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17846).

  • February 05, 2019

    4th Circuit Says ‘Booking.Com’ Marks Entitled To Protection

    RICHMOND, Va. — A divided Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 4 affirmed a Virginia federal judge’s determination that the Booking.com trademark has acquired secondary meaning, as well as that regardless of who prevailed, Booking.com should reimburse the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) $51,472.53 in attorney fees (Booking.com v. Andre Iancu, Nos. 17-2458, -2459, 4th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3456).

  • February 05, 2019

    Texas Federal Magistrate Judge: Deny Injunction In Trademark Case

    SAN ANTONIO — A plaintiff’s request for preliminary injunctive relief on allegations that an architectural firm infringed the “Arch-Con” trademark should be denied, a Texas federal magistrate judge recommended Feb. 1 (Arch-Con Construction Company v. Archcon Architecture Ltd., et al., No. 18-821, W.D. Texas., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16941).

  • February 01, 2019

    Prior Publication Exclusion Bars Coverage Of Trademark Suit, Idaho High Court Says

    BOISE, Idaho — The Idaho Supreme Court on Jan. 29 affirmed a lower court’s ruling that a commercial business insurance policy’s prior publication exclusion relieves the insurer of its duty to defend its insured against an underlying trademark dispute (Scout, LLC v. Truck Insurance Exchange, et al.,  No. 45349, Idaho Sup., 2019 Ida. LEXIS 12).

  • January 31, 2019

    Expert Opinions Admitted In Lawsuit Over Trademarks, Copyrights For Greeting Cards

    BOSTON — A Massachusetts federal judge on Jan. 29 allowed testimony from competing experts in a dispute over whether a maker of greeting cards falsified documents in a trademark and copyright row with another card company (LovePop, Inc. v. Paper Pop Cards, Inc., No. 17-11017, D. Mass., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14035).

  • January 30, 2019

    New Jersey Federal Judge Orders Cancellation Of ‘Anello’ Trademarks

    TRENTON, N.J. —A New Jersey federal judge on Jan. 28 granted summary judgment on a counterclaim seeking cancellation of two trademarks, agreeing with defendants that their cousins are not entitled to the registrations, which incorporate the last name “Anello” (Steven Anello, et al. v. VCA Sons Inc., et al., No. 13-3074, D. N.J., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13894).

  • January 29, 2019

    Dispute Over ‘Stufz’ Mark, Patent Transferred To Federal Circuit

    CINCINNATI — In a Jan. 28 holding, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that it lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a Michigan federal judge’s grant of summary judgment to a defendant accused of trademark and patent infringement (Wesley Corporation, et al. v. Zoom T.V. Products, et al., No. 18-1646, 6th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 2785).

  • January 22, 2019

    Supreme Court Won’t Review Finding That Trade Dress Claim Is Preempted

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — An August 2018 finding by the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a visual artist’s trade dress claim was preempted by the Copyright Act will stand, thanks to a denial of certiorari Jan. 22 by the U.S. Supreme Court (Bruce Munro, et al. v. Lucy Activewear Inc., et al., No. 18-615, U.S. Sup.).

  • January 18, 2019

    Artist, Sportswear Chain Debate Trade Dress Protection In Supreme Court Briefs

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals correctly found that a visual artist was not entitled to trade dress protection for his artistic light display, a women’s sportswear chain asserts in a Dec. 13 brief opposing the artist’s petition for certiorari and arguing that there is no overlap between trade dress and copyright law that needs review by the court (Bruce Munro, et al. v. Lucy Activewear Inc., et al., No. 18-615, U.S. Sup.).

  • January 16, 2019

    9th Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of Trademark Case, But Not As A Sanction

    SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 15 found that although a California federal judge abused his discretion in dismissing, as a sanction, allegations of trademark infringement and unfair competition, his earlier dismissal for failure to state a claim was proper (Applied Underwriters Inc. v. Larry J. Lichtenegger, et al., No. 17-16815, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 1291).

  • January 16, 2019

    Federal Circuit Affirms Refusal To Register ‘Casalana’ Trademark

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Jan. 14 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found no error in a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that affirmed an examining attorney’s refusal to register “Casalana” on grounds of failure to demonstrate use in commerce (In re:  Siny Corp., No. 18-1077, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 1136).

  • January 16, 2019

    Trademark Owner To High Court: Bankruptcy Filing Permitted License Termination

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Jan. 9 merits respondent brief, a trademark holder tells the U.S. Supreme Court that under “extraordinary authority” in the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, it was permitted to terminate a trademark license, stripping its former licensee’s rights to continue use of the once-licensed marks (Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology LLC, No. 17-1657, U.S. Sup.).

Can't find the article you're looking for? Click here to search the Mealey's Trademarks archive.