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….
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…
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…
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…
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…
Widow of longtime MAD artist Don Martin can go forward with mark infringement, publicity rights claims over publications that occurred within Florida’s four-year catch-all statute of limitations. The widow of MAD Magazine cartoonist Don Martin is not time-barred from pursuing trademark infringement and publicity rights claims against the publisher of MAD and DC Comics, to…
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,…
