WASHINGTON, D.C. — A determination of whether trademark counterfeiting has occurred necessarily includes a finding of whether there is a likelihood of confusion by consumers, a cosmetics company argues in a May 13 opposition brief, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to deny a competitor’s petition for certiorari, suggesting that the petitioner is seeking “to rewrite the Lanham Act.”
MIAMI — Two pharmaceutical companies on April 20 engaged in oral arguments before the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals over whether the purported false implication that a drug has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration can support a false advertising claim under the Lanham Act.
ST. LOUIS — A defendant was ordered May 12 by a federal magistrate judge in Missouri to pay an additional $42,031.80 in attorney fees incurred by a plaintiff in the defendant’s unsuccessful challenge of an existing $138,925 attorney fee award and finding of willful trademark infringement.
SEATTLE — In a May 11 trademark infringement complaint filed in Washington federal court, Amazon.com Inc. sued a group of John Doe defendants that it claims are responsible for text message schemes that fraudulently use the online retailer’s trademarks to entice recipients to visit the Does’ webpages for the purpose of creating web traffic that can be sold to advertisers.
MINNEAPOLIS — In an April 26 order, a federal judge in Minnesota ruled that there is “no reason” to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over contract claims leveled by a franchisor in view of the franchisor’s voluntary dismissal of allegations of trademark infringement.
BROOKLYN, N.Y. — The owners of two businesses associated with the “Mighty Bliss” massage device won dismissal of direct patent infringement allegations on April 29, but in the same ruling, a New York federal judge found that a related claim that the duo violated copyrights and trademarks will proceed.
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California on April 29 granted an ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), barring various defendants from manufacturing or selling a knockoff reversible octopus plushie.
DENVER — Although upholding a Colorado federal judge’s order directing the Georgia secretary of State to cancel an “E.R.I.C.A.” service mark, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 30 vacated a summary judgment that Bank of America Corp. (BofA) did not infringe the same unregistered federal mark because the district court applied an incorrect standard.
HARTFORD, Conn. — On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal judge in Connecticut on April 29 reinstated a jury’s advisory award of $90,759.36 in profits attributable to a defendant’s trademark infringement.
ATLANTA — A federal judge in Florida did not err in concluding that a trademark infringement complaint over the nationwide-movers.com domain fails to state a plausible claim for relief, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 28.
MIAMI — In an April 28 order, a federal judge in Florida found that Louis Vuitton Malletier enjoys a substantial likelihood that it will succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement and counterfeiting claims against the operators of various domains that sell fake Vuitton goods.
BROOKLYN, N.Y. — A dispute over the “Pony Malta” trademark that was voluntarily dismissed will not result in an award of attorney fees on behalf of two defendants, a federal judge in New York ruled April 26.
MADISON, Wis. — Although denying dismissal, a federal judge in Wisconsin on April 22 agreed that a dispute over the “Hope Surrogacy” trademark should proceed in North Carolina, where an infringement defendant resides.
SAN FRANCISCO — In an April 20 holding, a divided Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said a federal judge in California erred in granting Dropbox Inc. summary judgment on allegations that a cloud storage company infringed the “SmartSync” trademark.
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on April 1 ordered the brother of the late, legendary guitarist Jimi Hendrix to pay $100 per day as a penalty for continued noncompliance with court orders stemming from a copyright and trademark dispute.
DENVER — In an April 13 ruling, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that although a federal judge in Oklahoma did not abuse his discretion in granting a motion to enforce a settlement agreement between a franchisor and former franchisee accused of trademark infringement, he “went too far” in entering a $200,000 judgment.
NEW ORLEANS — Although upholding a Louisiana federal judge’s dismissal of allegations that H.J. Heinz Company Brands L.L.C. infringed the “Metchup” trademark, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 12 vacated a related order canceling the mark, citing the mark owner’s intent to continue selling his mustard-and-ketchup combination product in the future.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although dismissing allegations of false designation of origin, a federal judge in the District of Columbia on April 9 denied a request by the federal government to dismiss claims that it infringed the “Viewpoint” trademark with its annual “Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey.”
NEW YORK — A request by two defendants for a declaration that they did not infringe the “Slap Chop” trademark or copyrighted product packaging with the sale of various food preparation products will proceed, a New York federal judge ruled April 5.
CHICAGO — An Illinois-based real estate brokerage firm was unsuccessful March 31 in persuading an Illinois federal judge to bar a California-based provider of direct-to-consumer mortgage lending services from using “be.” as a trademark while the parties litigate allegations of federal and common law unfair competition.