The district court erred by failing to analyze infringement under reverse confusion theory. The federal district court in Miami erred by concluding as a matter of law that Amazon.com, Inc.’s Fire TV television set-top box service was unlikely to be confused with Wreal LLC’s subscription-based adult content video streaming service called FyreTV. The district court…
Manufacturer of “Mystic Tan” machines failed to show consumers were likely to be confused by salon’s use of its own solution in Mystic Tan booths. The federal district court in Akron, Ohio, did not err in finding that a manufacturer of tanning booths under the mark “Mystic Tan” failed to show a likelihood of success…
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) properly refused to register the mark “.SUCKS,” in standard characters and a stylized pixelated font, for failure to function as mark for the applicant’s domain name registry operator services, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled. Substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that consumers…
The Board was found to have applied the wrong standard for the second time in adjudicating the same claim. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board applied the wrong standard in determining that an Italian metal-working company by the name of Galperti did not commit fraud in its application to trademark its name, the U.S. Court…
Substantial evidence supported the Board’s likelihood of confusion finding. Substantial evidence supported the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that registration of the mark FOCUSVISION for software and data management services was likely to cause confusion with previously registered marks FOCUS for software and database management services, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal…
The district court on remand failed to explain the reason’s for its summary judgment and order directing the PTO to register a rival restaurant’s mark. The U.S. Court of Appeals in New York City for a second time has vacated a Manhattan district court’s judgment ordering the USPTO to grant New York City restaurant operator…
Trial evidence supported the district court’s judgment, blocking registration of VAGISAN in the United States. The federal district court in Alexandria did not err in finding that a German company’s mark VAGISAN used on feminine care products was likely to cause confusion with Combe, Inc.’s VAGISIL brand used on identical and overlapping goods, the U.S….
A party that appeals a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) decision to the Federal Circuit does not waive the right to challenge a subsequent TTAB decision in district court. A North Carolina district court erred in finding that it lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a TTAB decision issued after remand from the…
Tire maker entitled to recover on injunction bond for wrongful prohibition on sale of certain brand tires. The federal district court in Yakima, Washington, correctly ruled—on remand and in accordance with a prior instruction—that leaving a preliminary injunction in effect after trial was wrongful, the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco has held. However,…
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) erred by not applying the Supreme Court’s two-part Lexmark test in analyzing standing under 15 U.S.C. § 1064 but nevertheless reached the correct result because the Empresa Cubana standard used by the Board was substantially similar to Lexmark. The TTAB correctly determined that a company that owns federal registrations for SPROUTS trademarks in…
