39 results for 'cat:"Trademark" AND cat:"Damages"'.
J. Pepper enters a default judgment in favor of the vape pen manufacturer in its lawsuit against the smoke shop accused of selling counterfeit vaporizers bearing the manufacturer's trademarks. The manufacturer has done enough to prove its Lanham Act claims, but its claim for $200,000 in statutory damages is excessive, so it will be awarded $20,000 plus $497 in costs.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1018, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Stadtmueller finds the lower court properly entered default judgment against a wholesaler, as evidence is sufficient to show it was served notice and did not defend this patent and trademark infringement action. The tool designers are entitled to statutory damages, attorney fees and costs, and equitable relief as they have established the wholesaler is liable for patent infringement, trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and trade dress infringement relating to a roof climbing tool, but the instant court dismisses the tool designers’ claim of unfair competition. Affirmed in part.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1526, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent, trademark, damages
J. Hanks finds that an electric golf cart company using the name Trojan, which is registered trademark of a battery company, has infringed on the battery company’s trademark, so the court awards it over $9 million in infringer profits. The battery company has shown evidence that customers do confuse the two separate products.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Hanks, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 4:21cv3075, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, 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. 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. Cartwright grants the travel bag company statutory damages that are three times the aggregate sales of the counterfeit products that each of the sellers made by selling those unauthorized products on Amazon. The travel bag company shows that it owns the trademark associated with childcare travel accessories at issue and that the sellers advertised and sold the counterfeit products that confused customers into believing that they were buying genuine products.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Cartwright, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv1215, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Lin awards Dutch Blitz Acquisition $193,200 in statutory damages in its and Amazon's complaint that the sellers sold counterfeits of Dutch Blitz's products on Amazon's website. The award is appropriate, because the sellers intentionally sold counterfeit versions of Dutch Blitz's products and misused its trademarks, thus depriving Dutch Blitz of sales and causing customer confusion.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Lin, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv159, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Lynn grants, in part, a beauty supplier's motion for judgment as a matter of law in a hair extension-maker's trademark case against it. There is no evidence to support the jury's $1.3 million damages award for the supplier's breach of the parties' settlement agreement, and there is also no support for the hair extension-maker's unfair competition claim.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Lynn, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv2179, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, Unfair Competition, damages
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
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. Stadtmueller finds that, because the smoke shop has not responded to the glass pipe accessory company's complaint alleging the shop sold counterfeit versions of the company's products, the company's motion for default judgment must be granted. The company is awarded $75,000 in damages plus $1,028 in costs, an injunction is entered ordering the shop to provide any advertisements, products or other materials bearing the company's trademark to the company for destruction, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: December 29, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv780, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Delaney recommends granting, in part, default judgment to a glass infuser seller on its trademark infringement and unfair competition claims against a smoke shop. Although the seller sufficiently supported its claim for damages, it is entitled to only $5,000, rather than the requested $150,000, as it did not identify the marks or specify the number of marks within the shop.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Delaney, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2034, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Pepper finds the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessories in violation of federal law, and because the smoke shop has not appeared to defend itself, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $20,000 in damages, plus $497 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv751, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Pepper finds the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessories in violation of federal law, and because the smoke shop has not appeared to defend itself, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $20,000 in damages, plus $497 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv901, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Pepper finds the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessories in violation of federal law, and because the smoke shop has not appeared to defend itself, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $20,000 in damages, plus $497 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv778, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Pepper finds the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessories in violation of federal law, and because the smoke shop has not appeared to defend itself, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $20,000 in damages, plus $497 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv745, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Pepper finds the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessories in violation of federal law, and because the smoke shop has not appeared to defend itself, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $20,000 in damages, plus $597 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv696, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Pepper finds the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessories in violation of federal law, and because the smoke shop has not appeared to defend itself, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $20,000 in damages, plus $497 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv785, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Pepper finds the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessories in violation of federal law, and because the smoke shop has not appeared to defend itself, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $20,000 in damages, plus $497 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv897, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Stadtmueller finds that the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop infringed its trademarks by selling counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessory products and, since the shop has failed to appear to defend itself, grants the company's motion for default judgment. The company is awarded $75,000 in damages for infringement of its three marks, plus $1,001 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv748, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Stadtmueller finds that the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop infringed its trademarks by selling counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessory products and, since the shop has failed to appear to defend itself, grants the company's motion for default judgment. The company is awarded $75,000 in damages for infringement of its three marks, plus $931 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv750, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Stadtmueller finds the glass pipe company's trademark infringement lawsuit alleging the smoke shop sold counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessory products is supported by adequate evidence, and because the shop has not appeared to defend itself in the lawsuit, the company's motion for default judgment is granted. The company is awarded $75,000 in damages for infringement of the three disputed marks, plus $862 in costs, a permanent injunction is entered banning the smoke shop from its infringing activities, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv697, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Stadtmueller finds that the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop infringed its trademarks by selling counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessory products and, since the shop has failed to appear to defend itself, grants the company's motion for default judgment. The company is awarded $75,000 in damages for infringement of its three marks, plus $912 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv743, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Stadtmueller finds that the glass pipe company has adequately proven the smoke shop infringed its trademarks by selling counterfeit versions of its glass pipe accessory products and, since the shop has failed to appear to defend itself, grants the company's motion for default judgment. The company is awarded $75,000 in damages for infringement of its three marks, plus $931 in costs, and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv701, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Robart grants the glass infuser company $5,000 in statutory damages and $687 in litigation costs for its complaint alleging that the tobacco shop and its owner sold unauthorized counterfeit glass infusers bearing the glass infuser company's "Studenglass" trademark. The glass infuser company demonstrates that it owns a valid Studenglass mark, and that the tobacco shop's use of that mark is likely to cause consumer confusion.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Robart, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv374, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Robart awards the glass infuser company $5,000 in statutory damages and $592 in litigation costs against the tobacco shop and its owner for selling counterfeit glass infusers beating the glass infuser company's "Stundenglass" trademark. The glass infuser company demonstrates that it owns a valid Studenglass mark, the tobacco shop sold at least one item bearing the mark and that the tobacco shop's use of that mark is likely to cause consumer confusion.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Robart, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv318, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Robart awards the glass infuser company $5,000 in statutory damages and $687 in litigation costs against the tobacco shop and its owner for selling unauthorized glass infusers bearing the glass infuser company's "Studenglass" trademark. The glass infuser company demonstrates that it owns a valid Studenglass mark, and that the tobacco shop's use of that mark is likely to cause consumer confusion.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Robart, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv321, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: trademark, damages
J. Kelley grants a kosher certifying organization’s motion for default judgment against a food supplier that puts the organization’s trademark certifying its products as kosher on its products even though its products do not adhere to the certification and the organization issued a cease-and-desist letter. The supplier is no longer allowed to use the trademark and owes the organization $593,829.67.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Kelley, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv11460, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: trademark, damages