Second Circuit: Famous marks doctrine doesn’t support NY unfair competition claim In a recent decision, the Second Circuit decided the one outstanding issue from a case it had previously decided in March 2007 (previously blogged here), namely whether the "famous marks" doctrine the court held Congress has not yet incorporated into federal trademark law might support a New York common law claim for unfair competition. The […] Continue Reading →
Second Circuit: Statements made in settlement discussions admissible to prove estoppel In a decision yesterday, the Second Circuit affirmed a jury's findings in a trademark infringement case between Polo Ralph Lauren and the U.S. Polo Association. The jury found that one of the USPA's four marks was likely to cause confusion. The two parties had been involved in a previous lawsuit in the early 1980s, and […] Continue Reading →
Fifth Circuit affirms injunction against trademark infringement in Saudi Arabia In a recent decision, the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of infringement and disgorgement of profits, but increased the amount of profits awarded because the defendant failed to provide evidence of its costs to reduce the award. Interestingly, the infringement took place entirely outside the United States, namely in Saudi Arabia. Even though […] Continue Reading →
Seventh Circuit: Operating agreement permitted license of marks, so no trademark infringement In its second trademark decision Friday, the Seventh Circuit clarified what is required for a party to be authorized to use another entity's trademarks. In this case, the plaintiff—one of four founders of two LLC's designed to manage and control a restaurant in Chicago—alleged trademark infringement against the three other co-founders based on the co-founders' […] Continue Reading →
Seventh Circuit: Sanction of no damages for improper witness contact too severe compared to harm In a decision Friday, the Seventh Circuit affirmed a jury verdict of trademark infringement, but reversed the district court's ruling holding the plaintiff had forfeited damages because of improper conduct towards a prospective witness. The court dealt with whether the burden of proof for the sanction was by clear and convincing evidence or as the […] Continue Reading →
Seizure of goods with counterfeit marks not an “embargo,” so no CIT jurisdiction to challenge fine In a decision this week, the Federal Circuit vacated the decision of the Court of International Trade (CIT) and remanded with instructions to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.The case arose out of a civil fine levied against the plaintiff for importation of counterfeit goods. The plaintiff brought suit in the […] Continue Reading →
Second Circuit: Sales pitch of slogan to credit card companies not use in commerce In a decision Monday, the Second Circuit affirmed a district court's summary judgment in a trademark case involving the slogan "My Life. My Card." An individual threatened to sue American Express for use of the slogan, alleging that he had superior rights in the mark based on efforts to license the phrase to various credit […] Continue Reading →
Eleventh Circuit: Trademark licensee liable for infringement when deviating from license In a decision Tuesday, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of trademark infringement against a trademark licensee. The alleged infringer was actually licensed to use the mark owner's trademark, but did not use the mark as described in the license, instead using an abbreviated form. As a result, the court affirmed the jury's […] Continue Reading →
Ninth Circuit clarifies differences between proof of protectable trademark and proof of infringement In a decision Friday, the Ninth Circuit clarified the differences in use requirements to prove the existence of a protectable trademark as compared to trademark infringement. The plaintiff and defendant both used the same mark, but in connection with different services. The defendant successfully argued at the district court that because the plaintiff did not […] Continue Reading →
Ninth Circuit: Attorney fees only available for trademark counterfeiting when actual damages sought In a decision Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's decision awarding $100,000 in attorney's fees for trademark counterfeiting under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(c). The court reached this decision based on the language of § 1117: While § 1117(b), the provision allowing attorney's fees, states that they shall be awarded when damages are assessed […] Continue Reading →