446 results for 'cat:"Trademark"'.
J. Robart dismisses Amazon's false advertising claim accusing the listed seller of selling counterfeit Nite Ize STEELIE products on Amazon's platform by using both his own name and several pseudonyms. Amazon does not plausibly allege that the listed seller is liable under this claim, because Amazon does not allege that the listed seller made false statements in their commercial advertisements to influence consumers or to compete with Amazon.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Robart, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 2:19cv990, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, False Advertising
J. Liburdi grants a Korean television distributor's motion for default judgment against a luggage seller on claims of copyright infringement. The TV distributor sufficiently showed in court that the luggage seller is using its trademark and domain names without permission.
Court: USDC Arizona, Judge: Liburdi, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1819, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark
J. Bryson grants default judgment against a company that sells body sculpting devices that allegedly infringe an plaintiff's patents and trademarks by ordering removal of all infringing website content. However, money damages should be denied for lack of supporting evidence as to the number of infringing products that had been sold.
Court: USDC Delaware, Judge: Bryson, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv359, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent, trademark, Damages
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Hernandez denies the Argil DX's sole member's motion for summary judgment for the Stored Communication Act and invasion of privacy counterclaims brought by the co-founder of Axeno Consulting, as the sole member accuses the four executives of Axeno of wrongfully using the "Argil DX" trademark. While there is little evidence that the co-founder intended to keep his business emails private from the sole member, which would make the latter accessing them excusable, there is not enough evidence to prove that the sole member had sufficient permission to do so.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Hernandez, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv621, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Evidence, trademark
J. Lake transfers a company's copyright and trademark action against an institute in connection with works and a mark associated with a Buddhist monk to the Central District of California, Western Division. The institute is based in California, and the company fails to show it has the minimum contacts with Texas to establish jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Lake, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv2812, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Copyright, trademark, Jurisdiction
J. Proctor denies the insurance company Blue Cross Blue Shield’s motion for partial summary judgment from this lawsuit related to several of BCBS’s “Blue Plans” in this antitrust litigation trademark dispute brought by a St. Paul, Minnesota, hospital. The Blue Plans used the hospital’s symbol, but not the mark, and BCBS argues it has common law trademark rights to the symbol. Questions of fact remain regarding the licenses to the marks in various markets.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Proctor, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 2:13cv20000, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Antitrust, Evidence, trademark
J. Wood denies a Chinese e-commerce platform Wanfan’s motion to dismiss an underlying trademark suit brought against it by an Australian toy company. The Australian company claims in the underlying suit that the Chinese platform sold multicolored cubes, infringing the Australian company’s own trademarked, multicolored cube toys. Wanfan calls the suit “frivolous” and seeks dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue and insufficient service of process. The court disagrees on all fronts, finding Wanfan was properly served, that it has no basis to argue over venue, and that the Australian company “has had sufficient contacts with the United States to support personal jurisdiction over [the Chinese platform’s] federal claims.”
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Wood, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2330, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: International Law, trademark, Business Practices
J. Douglas finds the district court properly found in favor of Rolex in this trademark infringement suit against a watch restorer that advertises refurbished watches as "genuine Rolex," though its products contain Rolex and non-Rolex parts. The watches lacked sufficient disclosures, which created a likelihood of confusion in consumers. Rolex failed to show the knowing bad faith necessary to foreclose the restorer's equitable laches defense based on Rolex's delay in filing suit, and no damages were awarded. Affirmed in part.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Douglas , Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: 22-10866, Categories: trademark, Damages
J. Arnold finds a lower court improperly dismissed trademark claims brought by Umbro against Dream Pairs. Dream Pairs argued that its trade mark for its sports based clothing is valid. However, Umbro sufficiently showed in court that Dream Pairs' trademark, which is practically identical, is invalid and confuses consumers. Reversed.
Court: Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, Judge: Arnold, Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: CA-2023-1043, Categories: trademark
J. Carter denies the lawn games manufacturer's motion to exclude the mischaracterization of its trade dress, which concerns the lawn games manufacturer's lawsuit that the outdoor games products company's TP White Connect 4 game infringes the lawn games manufacturer's Four In a Row game. The outdoor games company present facts that sufficiently question the functionality of elements of the lawn games manufacturer's definition of its trade dress.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Carter, Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: 8:19cv523, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Evidence, trademark
J. Grosjean recommends granting, in part, a solar company’s motion for default judgment in its trademark infringement case against a solar business owner. The owner failed to respond to the complaint, and the solar company has sufficiently alleged he infringed its marks.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Grosjean, Filed On: January 23, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv999, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, Attorney Fees
J. Cogburn denies a home security company’s motion for attorney fees in its trademark infringement suit against a competitor. In a jury trial, the company was awarded $140 million in punitive damages, some of which can be put toward attorney fees and is sufficient as a deterrent to the competitor not to engage in similar behavior going forward.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Cogburn, Filed On: January 23, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv504, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trade, trademark, Unfair Competition
J. Cogburn denies a pool products manufacturer’s motion in limine to exclude the expert testimony of a competitor that sued it for trademark infringement. The manufacturer argues that the expert’s testimony is improper, but this is to do with the expert’s methods, which it is free to debate using cross-examination. The manufacturer has raised nothing to stop the admission of the testimony.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Cogburn, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv710, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Evidence, trademark, Experts
J. Stadtmueller denies Giannis Antetokounmpo's motion for a protective order in his lawsuit in part alleging that the mattress company made fraudulent representations about four mattresses he ordered delivered to Athens, Greece, and that the company used his name and likeness as a popular professional basketball player on its Instagram account without his consent. Antetokounmpo has provided no burdens or other circumstances that would prohibit depositions the company has requested from him and his partner regarding venue and jurisdiction, so the depositions will proceed, but they should be limited to two hours per deposition.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1389, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Fraud, trademark