The court found that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s (TTAB) decision was supported by substantial evidence. A real estate brokerage’s proposed mark was likely to be confused with a prior registration, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. The TTAB’s prior analysis as to each of the DuPont factors was supported by…
District court failed to draw inferences in favor of nonmoving party in finding no likelihood of confusion. The federal district court in Miami erred in awarding summary judgment for a title insurance company regarding its use of the mark ‘FOREMOST,’ the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has held. The Eleventh Circuit found…
The General Court of the European Union (“GCEU”), annulling the Board of Appeal (“BOA”) decision, found that L’Oreal’s K K WATER mark is not confusingly similar to Heinze’s earlier K mark. It was not disputed that the hair treatment goods covered by L’Oreal’s K K WATER mark in Class 3 (a sub-brand of its leading house…
A judgment of the General Court demonstrates the controversial and problematic nature of retail services marks. The ALDI/ALDIANO Case The case concerns Aldi, the discount chain. An Aldi entity (in the following “Aldi”) filed an application for the declaration of invalidity against the EUTM ALDIANO, registered for “alcoholic beverages (except beers)” (class 33). Aldi relied…
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…
In a case of first impression, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Madrid Protocol gave a European company priority of right in a trademark even without prior use in commerce. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the California district court that Bacardi’s use of BACARDI UNTAMEABLE for rum did not as a matter of law infringe…
The LEHMAN BROTHERS mark has been used continuously in the course of winding up the affairs of at least one Lehman Brothers affiliated company. In a case involving competing applications to register the mark LEHMAN BROTHERS, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal…
The prince and his prince house – where he lived happily ever after The Swiss Federal Administrative Court, as the appeal authority in opposition proceedings, supported the decision of the FIIP and ruled that there was a likelihood of confusion between the younger trademark “Prinzenhaus” (engl. prince house) and the earlier trademark “Prinz” (engl. prince)…
On 21st December 2021, the General Court (GC), in case T-369/20, dealt with “likelihood of association” setting out a double test which seems to be at odds with the previous case law, notably the landmark Sabel case (C-251/95). The EUTM application “CEFA Certified European Financial Analyst” in classes 9 and 41 was opposed on the…
On 5 November 2021, the Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court (the Court) issued a ruling between Kejser Sausage ApS (‘Kejser Sausage’) and Keyser KBH ApS among others (‘Keyser’). The case concerned Kejser Sausage’s gourmet hot dog stand in Copenhagen, which used the trademark ‘Kejser Sausage’. Elsewhere in Copenhagen, Keyser used the name ‘Keyser Social’…
