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….

The district court’s attorney fee award was reasonable and did not violate First Amendment freedom of speech. In a trademark infringement case between two civic organizations that promote political candidates in Louisiana, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a judgment by the district court awarding over $148,000 in attorney fees. In…

According to the German Federal Supreme Court’s decision of 29 July 2021 (Case I ZR 139/20) the gold-colored foil of Lindt’s chocolate bunny is protected by a trademark acquired through use. The Court lifted the decision of the Higher District Court Munich which had rejected an infringement action against a competing product denying trademark protection…

The summary judgment finding by the district court which rejected an air mattress company’s theory of initial-interest confusion and the accompanying jury instruction that a likelihood of confusion must exist at the time of purchase to support a trademark infringement claim was erroneous. In a suit by bedding manufacturer Select Comfort against a competitor for…

As you may recall, the CJEU in cases C-449/18P and C-474/18P of 17 September 2020, (see https://trademarkblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/09/23/lionel-messi-scores-his-surname-trade-mark-the-cjeus-own-goal/) held that consumers recognized MESSI as the surname of the soccer player Lionel Messi, and considered this fact a matter of common knowledge because any reasonably observant and circumspect consumer was thought to regularly read in the newspapers…

In its TARGET VENTURES decision of 28 October 2020 (T-273/19), the General Court stated that there could be bad faith when there were objective indicia of a dishonest intention of the trademark owner, not necessarily linked to causing damage to a third party, when it seeks to obtain an abusive exclusive right. The case is…

In granting summary judgment, the district court incorrectly assumed that “actual use” of unregistered service mark requires actual sales and revenue generation. A federal district court applied an incorrect legal standard for “actual use” by plaintiff Erik M. Underwood of his unregistered service mark E.R.I.C.A., the Tenth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver has…

Last year, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) took a decision clarifying the effects of the “Praktiker” decision on trademarks registered for “retail services” without further specifications in class 35 before the date of that judgement’s delivery in 2005. Regarding the background of the case, the German company Burlington Fashion GmbH, well-known for their argyle…

On 18 May 2021, the Polish Supreme Court issued a much awaited ruling to resolve doubts concerning the national limitation period of non-pecuniary claims in trademark matters. The resolution was adopted in the context of an infringement case of the frontline EU trade mark (EUTM) owned by Audi AG (see below). The Supreme Court’s resolution…