23 results for 'cat:"Evidence" AND cat:"Trademark"'.
J. Vera grants default judgment to the doctor for his complaint that the British company tried to patent specimens with the doctor's "ChildLife" marks, which he uses for his nutritional supplements containing vitamins, minerals and antioxidants to address health issues among children. Default judgment is appropriate because the British company and its owner did not appear or participate in this action, and they neither contested nor submitted controverting evidence about ownership or validity.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Vera, Filed On: May 15, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv3463, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark
J. Hanen denies summary judgment in a case involving trademark claims between two packaged food companies, where the suing company uses the label name “Daily Delight” and other “delight” phrases, and the sued firm uses the label name “Instant Delight,” which is not one of the suing company’s trademarked phrases. The sued firm says that, because “Instant Delight” is not one of plaintiff’s protected marks, they are entitled to summary judgment, but the suing competitor has presented evidence indicating that customers and vendors confuse the products, so the case can move on for determination at trial.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Hanen, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 4:21cv2012, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, evidence, trademark
J. Kato finds in favor of the science-based nutritional supplement company for its complaint seeking a declaration that its use of the "Nature's Day" mark does not infringe on the dietary supplement brand's mark. The dietary supplement brand does not present evidence that the company knew that the products using the "Nature's Day" mark caused customer confusion, and the dietary supplement brand did not conduct discovery diligently enough to justify giving it more time to conduct discovery.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Kato, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv766, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark, Discovery
J. Dorsey awards the litigation support company $217,500 in damages in this trademark infringement suit. The infringing company waived its unenforceable penalty defense because of its failure to raise it in a timely manner, which materially prejudiced the other company's ability to obtain and present evidence. The liquidated-damages provision entitles the company to the award.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Dorsey , Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2035, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark, Damages
J. Beetlestone grants in part Rite Aid’s motion to seal certain portions of the summary judgment record in this trademark dispute with a font maker who alleges the pharmacy used one of its typefaces, Neutraface, in its multi-million dollar corporate rebrand without the maker’s permission. It is reasonable to redact some of RiteAid’s proprietary financial data that was used to weigh this case.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Beetlestone, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv1174, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark, Business Practices
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. Stivers rules in part for the Marker's Mark whiskey distillery regarding evidence in a trademark claims contending defendant sold cigars in violation of the Maker's Mark trademark following termination of the licensing agreement. However, the survey performed by an expert witness to demonstrate the similarities between the cigars should be excluded because the expert did not establish the results were reliable.
Court: USDC Western District of Kentucky, Judge: Stivers, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 3:19cv14, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark, Experts
J. Campbell dismisses a materials science technology company's motion for preliminary injunction concerning trademark claims against a factory and former business associate in Asia. The factory and business associate sufficiently showed in court that it did not infringe on the company's plastic lined trays and lids when it accepted applications for new products, which were not based on the technology company's prototypes.
Court: USDC Arizona, Judge: Campbell, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: 2:24cv93, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark, Contract
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. 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. 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. 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. Arnold finds a lower court properly dismissed a group of "Swatch" watch makers trademark claims against Samsung. Swatch argued that Samsung infringed on two of its smart watches' dial branding technology apps. However, Swatch failed to properly show in court that Samsung was aware of the alleged illegal activity. Affirmed.
Court: Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, Judge: Arnold, Filed On: December 15, 2023, Case #: CA-2022-1738, Categories: evidence, trademark
J. Graves finds the district court properly granted the real estate exchange's motion for judgment as a matter of law in this trademark infringement suit. Though evidence that the company's marks are perceived as primarily a personal name was shown, the exchange argued that its use of "Rex" was according to the Latin translation and that its customers perceived it this way. Still, a reasonable jury could find in the company's favor for infringement of the marks before they were federally registered. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part and remanded.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Graves , Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: 22-50405, Categories: evidence, Real Estate, trademark
J. Browning grants Warner Bros.' motion for partial summary judgment, ruling the signature of supernatural investigator Lorraine Warren on a trademark assignment sheet, which may have been forged, is immaterial. She had already sold the rights to "Seekers of the Supernatural" and other marks to New Line several years before, which gave them total ownership over all name and image rights. Meanwhile, the undisputed evidence in the record indicates numerous customers were confused about the source of books and videos depicting the paranormal investigators and sold by the individual defendant, which is sufficient to prove trademark infringement and unfair competition.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Browning, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: 1:20cv62, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, Fraud, trademark
J. Adlin reverses the examining attorney's refusal to approve Duracell's application to register a three-note musical sound for its batteries, referring to the sound as "'merely advertisements.'" Duracell shows the musical sound is used as part of certain displays associated with the batteries and, therefore, demonstrates trademark use.
Court: Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, Judge: Adlin, Filed On: July 24, 2023, Case #: 90559208, Categories: evidence, trademark
J. Hernandez partially denies the digital experience company founder's motion to compel information about the computer consultant founder's use of certain disputed emails for the latter's claim that the former wrongfully took the computer consultant's customers. The work product doctrine protects the computer consultant founder's pre-litigation use of the disputed emails because he could not have anticipated that his use of those emails would be relevant to the lawsuit before the complaint was filed.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Hernandez, Filed On: July 5, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv621, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark, Discovery
J. Frank denies a motion to amend the case caption to substitute two named plaintiffs with a single plaintiff and makes rulings on a number of motions in limine. The Court will instruct the jury that the bed maker's "Sleep Number" mark is "strong and famous" and deem any evidence contesting that contention presumptively inadmissible. The bedmaker's competitors are not, however, precluded from contesting actual confusion or excluded from conducting a bed demonstration. Evidence of antitrust claims from a prior trial or of allegations of anti-competitive conduct is also presumptively inadmissible, as is evidence of any other litigation of enforcement actions. Evidence of cease-and-desist letters is presumptively admissible, but evidence regarding whether the bedmaker has trademark rights in the phrase "Number Bed" is not.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Frank, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 0:12cv2899, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: evidence, trademark