NIKE no longer had a legally cognizable interest in the validity of the preliminary injunction. NIKE, Inc., was precluded from appealing a district court’s preliminary injunction issued in November 2019 barring the athletic footwear giant from using the phrase “Sport Changes Everything” in an advertising campaign, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond has ruled….
The record, however, supported that “Bayside Breeze” mark was not infringed by “Boardwalk Breeze” as a matter of law. In a trademark infringement suit between competing sellers of automotive air freshener products, a federal district court erred in finding on summary judgment that “Little Trees” brand products with a scent called “Black Ice” was not…
Costco raised triable issues of fact as to its liability for infringement and counterfeiting and whether its use of “Tiffany” to describe a ring style was fair use. The federal district court in Manhattan erred in concluding as a matter of law that Costco’s use of the word “Tiffany” to describe diamond engagement rings amounted…
The business owner’s purported plans to expand to the United States market were vague and conclusory, and his filing of a U.S. trademark application had little bearing on his ability to expand his business to the United States. A Manhattan federal district court did not err in dismissing a Thai resident’s declaratory judgment action seeking…
Expired utility patent described the advantages of product configuration trade dress for “a beveled scalloped upper edge of a metal fastener.” The federal district court in Chicago properly determined trade dress for the design of conveyer belt fasteners owned by Flexible Steel Lacing Company (Flexco) was invalid as functional and could not be asserted against…
A seller of parody tote bags that prevailed on trademark infringement, dilution, and copyright infringement claims brought by Louis Vuitton was not entitled to recover attorney fees. Case date: 15 March 2019 Case number: No. 18-293-cv. Court: United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP…
In an opposition proceeding brought by Frito-Lay North America against Real Foods Pty Ltd., the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board properly determined that the marks CORN THINS and RICE THINS were highly descriptive of their respective goods—”crispbread slices predominantly of corn, namely popped corn cakes” and “crispbread slices primarily made of rice, namely rice cakes”—and…
In a trademark dispute over use of the brand name ROGUE for clothing, the federal district court in New York City erred by ruling on summary judgment that an apparel manufacturer was the rightful owner of the mark for clothing, and that an Oregon brewery was only entitled to sell clothing under the ROGUE Mark…
A federal district court’s award of attorney fees under the Lanham Act and Utah’s Truth in Advertising Act (UTIAA) to a defendant following the parties’ stipulation of dismissal has been vacated and the case remanded by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver. The defendant was not a prevailing party entitled to attorney fees under…
Substantial evidence supported the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that the mark “AQUAPEL” and design for leather and imitation leather hides, furniture covers, and various home goods was confusingly similar to the mark “AQUAPEL,” registered in standard characters, for different types of home goods, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has…
