First Circuit affirmed a decision to dismiss a trademark suit brought by Motus LLC against CarData Consultants Inc. for a lack of personal jurisdiction, and because alleged trademark infringement was not shown to be an intentional tort within the forum state. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a…
Although the federal court stayed its action to allow a state court to determine the scope of certain licenses, the stay could not be reviewed on appeal because it did not effectively end the federal court litigation. A federal court’s decision to temporarily stay a trademark lawsuit in order to allow a state court to…
Substantial evidence supported the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that another company, and not the trademark holder, actually used the mark in commerce. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) correctly determined that a Korean biopharmaceutical company did not use in commerce the mark for a nutritional product that purportedly improves brain performance, the…
The Board erred by failing to consider whether the registered BROOKLYN BREW SHOP mark has acquired distinctiveness for beer-making kits. In an effort by the owners of the mark BROOKLYN BREWERY to cancel registration of the mark BROOKLYN BREW SHOP, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that the Trademark Trial…
Panel confirms that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) need not find that a German company owned a US trademark rights to pursue a cancelation action. In denying a California piano retailer’s petition for rehearing, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has expanded on the panel’s prior decision…
A party that was voluntarily dismissed from an ordinary trademark infringement case was not the “prevailing” party and was not entitled to attorney fees under the Lanham Act or Florida law. The U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta has affirmed a Florida district court’s decision that a defunct bus service company that had been voluntarily dismissed from…
Full disclosure of the identity of the restorer and the used nature of the product protects a seller of second-hand goods from liability for a trademark infringement claim. Hamilton International Ltd., a well-known pocket watch parts manufacturer, failed to prove the likelihood of consumer confusion in its suit alleging that Vortic LLC infringed its trademark…
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….
