Mealey's Trademarks
-
July 01, 2024
Judge Nixes Clothier’s Contributory Infringement Claim Against Website
NEW YORK — A streetwear company founded by rapper Young Thug does not show that online marketplace websites were aware that merchants were selling trademarked material and thus cannot pursue a contributory trademark infringement claim against them, a federal judge in New York found, dismissing one count against the websites from the complaint.
-
June 28, 2024
High Court Overrules Chevron Deference, Changes Standard For Regulatory Review
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 28 voted 6-3 to overrule the doctrine of Chevron deference as incompatible with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in two cases arising out of federal fishing regulations, changing governing precedent for federal courts reviewing agencies’ regulatory actions.
-
June 24, 2024
5th Circuit: Store Infringed ‘Appliance Liquidation Outlet’ Mark, But No Fees Owed
NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on June 21 partly reversed a Texas federal judge’s finding in a trademark infringement case, finding that the judge correctly held that a company’s trademark on “Appliance Liquidation Outlet” was infringed but incorrectly held that “Appliance Liquidation” is a valid mark in a dispute between competing stores.
-
June 24, 2024
High Court To Decide If Lanham Act Allows Disgorgement Of Nonparty Profits
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 granted a real estate firm’s petition for a writ of certiorari, agreeing to consider whether courts under the Lanham Act “can include an order for the defendant to disgorge the distinct profits of legally separate non-party corporate affiliates” and if the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals improperly upheld a $43 million disgorgement award against it.
-
June 19, 2024
Judge Rules ‘Florida Man’ Not Famous Enough For Dilution In Trademark Dispute
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A federal judge in Florida granted in part a Florida company and its principal’s motion to dismiss a complaint alleging that the company violated another company’s “FLORIDA MAN” trademark, finding that the mark is not “famous” under federal or Florida law.
-
June 17, 2024
4th Circuit: Lanham Act Does Not Preclude Judicial Review In Dispute Over Rum Mark
RICHMOND, Va. — A panel of judges in the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that the Lanham Act does not preclude judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), remanding to a Virginia federal judge a rum manufacturer’s claim that the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office inappropriately allowed a rival brand to renew a trademark a decade after its expiration.
-
June 14, 2024
New York City Can Intervene In Cannabis Cruise Copyright, Trademark Litigation
NEW YORK — Citing the “undeniable interest” the city of New York has in a trademark and copyright infringement action involving the “NYC NEW YORK CANNABIS” logo, a federal judge in New York has granted the city’s motion to intervene.
-
June 13, 2024
Magistrate Judge Denies Bid To Seal Financial Data In Patent, Trademark Row
NEW YORK — A letter request to redact “the factual basis” for a request for damages by a patent and trademark infringement plaintiff against defaulting infringement defendants has been rejected by a federal magistrate judge in New York.
-
June 13, 2024
In Win For PTO, High Court Declares ‘Names’ Clause Constitutional
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The full U.S. Supreme Court on June 13 reversed a ruling by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a provision of federal trademark law barring registrations that “falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead” violates free speech rights, but the justices, in several concurrences, offered vastly different reasons why.
-
June 10, 2024
High Court Passes On Challenge To Review Standard For Likely Confusion
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Grubhub Inc. remains free to use a logo that drew the ire of a meal kit delivery service, with the U.S. Supreme Court on June 10 denying a petition for writ of certiorari that asked whether a trial court determination of likely confusion is reviewable on appeal for clear error, de novo or a combination of both standards.
-
June 10, 2024
Panel Upholds Dismissal In Dispute Over ‘Pet Friendly’ Dog Shampoo
ATLANTA — A federal judge in Alabama did not err in granting a motion to dismiss trademark and copyright infringement claims leveled in connection with dog shampoo marketed as “pet friendly,” the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has concluded.
-
June 03, 2024
Patent, Trade Dress Row Over Vape Design Will Proceed Without Injunction
CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois overseeing a dispute between competing vape makers has rejected as premature a motion to dismiss counterclaims of design patent and trade dress infringement as well as a motion by the counterclaimant for a preliminary injunction.
-
May 30, 2024
Appellate Jurisdiction Lacking Over Denied Bid For Injunction Clarification
NEW YORK — An appellant who was permanently enjoined from packaging its whiskey in a manner that dilutes the trademark of a competitor failed in its request for review of a New York federal judge’s refusal to clarify that one of its packaging designs is nondilutive and that its redesigned packaging would be injunction-compliant, with the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals finding, sua sponte, it lacks appellate jurisdiction.
-
May 29, 2024
Panel: Failure To Rebut Evidence Of Senior Use Dooms Trademark Case
NEW YORK — A trademark infringement counterclaimant failed May 28 to persuade the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reinstate a dispute over “Now-Casting” and “Nowcast” with the appeals court concluding the appellant “utterly failed to proffer any evidence rebutting” a competitor’s showing that it was the first to use the trademarks.
-
May 29, 2024
3rd Circuit Upholds Denial Of Reconsideration Of Mark Cancellation
PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge in New Jersey committed no abuse of discretion in denying a motion for reconsideration of his January 2019 summary judgment holding that ordered the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to cancel two trademarks because the motion was untimely and without merit, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 28.
-
May 29, 2024
Tool Firm To Nevada Supreme Court: No Strict Liability For Trademark Licensor
CARSON CITY, Nev. — Filing a May 28 brief responding to a question certified to the Nevada Supreme Court by a federal judge, a tool company that licensed its trademark for use on a tool at the heart of a products liability suit asks the high court to find that strict liability applies under the apparent manufacturer doctrine only if a licensor is substantially involved with the product beyond merely providing the trademark.
-
May 24, 2024
Minority Winery Owner Can’t Satisfy Lexmark In Bid To Cancel Trademarks
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A minority owner of a California winery on May 23 failed to persuade the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to direct the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to reinstate its petitions for cancellation of the “ALVAREDOS-HOBBS” and “HILLICK AND HOBBS” trademarks for use in connection with wine.
-
May 22, 2024
WIPO Warns PTO: Fee Increase For Trademarks Violates Madrid Protocol
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — As the comment period draws to a close on plans by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to raise fees in fiscal year 2025 on certain trademark applications, the World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) has weighed in with a warning that the proposal as written runs afoul of the primary system for international trademark registration.
-
May 21, 2024
8th Circuit Affirms Insurer Has Duty To Defend Against Trademark Infringement Suit
ST. LOUIS — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 20 affirmed a lower federal court’s finding that an insurer has a duty to defend its computer networking products reseller insured against an underlying trademark infringement lawsuit, noting that this does not resolve the issue of whether the insurer has a duty to indemnify, which will turn on the resolution of the underlying lawsuit.
-
May 21, 2024
With Panel ‘Bound By’ Herbal Brands, ‘Detoxify’ Trademark Cases Reinstated
SAN FRANCISCO — Two online sellers of products that allegedly make an infringing use of the “Detoxify” trademark must defend their actions in court, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 20, reversing dismissal of the cases on jurisdiction grounds by two separate California federal judges.
-
May 20, 2024
Cert Bid By Self-Professed ‘Digital Nomad’ Fails In Trademark Jurisdiction Row
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on May 20 revealed that it will not weigh in on a finding by a divided Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel that a California court can exercise jurisdiction over a one-person company that has not operated in the Golden State since 2016.
-
May 16, 2024
Despite Phonetic Similarity, Confusion Unlikely Between ‘SUNSAUCE,’ ‘SON SAUCE’
SAN FRANCISCO — Litigation between two sauce makers will proceed without preliminary injunctive relief in place, a federal judge in California has ruled, because the Thailand-based plaintiff, owner of the “SUNSAUCE” trademark, has not shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its allegation that a California company infringes with its “SON SAUCE” product.
-
May 16, 2024
Appellants Say Court’s OpenAI Secondary Meaning Ruling Was In Error
SAN FRANCISCO — A trial court erred in finding that the OpenAI mark acquired a secondary meaning with the release of its Dall-E website and before the release of the vastly more popular ChatGPT while ignoring analogous uses of the mark and that all the allegedly irreparable harm was speculative, a company tells the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
-
May 15, 2024
PUMA Design Patent Claim Survives Early Challenge In Washington
SEATTLE — A motion for judgment on the pleadings by Brooks Sports Inc. was partly granted May 14 when a federal judge in Washington ordered a purported trademark licensor to be joined to an infringement action initiated by a rival athletic footwear company.
-
May 15, 2024
Grubhub Calls Likelihood Of Confusion Cert Petition ‘Unremarkable,’ Poor Vehicle
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A trial court’s determination of whether there is a likelihood of confusion between two trademarks is due “great deference,” Grubhub Inc. tells the U.S. Supreme Court in a brief opposing a petition for certiorari in a trademark dispute, representing that nothing about the case is noteworthy or in need of attention from the high court.