Sections 32(1)(a) and 43(a)(1)(A) of the Lanham Act impose civil liability on any person who “use[s] in commerce” a trademark in a manner that “is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.” 15 U.S.C. 1114(1)(a); 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(1). Notably, the Lanham Act defines commerce broadly as “all commerce which may lawfully … Continue reading
The ink was not even dry on the update regarding Russia-related IP issues that we published last week, when we learned of two more major developments. The USPTO recently issued the following statement on engagement with Russia, the Eurasian Patent Organization and Belarus: Per guidance issued by the U.S. Department of State, the United States Patent and Trademark Office … Continue reading
February 24, 2022, Russian troops poured over the border into Ukraine, unleashing unimaginable human suffering and widespread destruction of property. Russia’s aggression also ignited negative consequences in the international economy that continue to increase and cascade throughout all sectors and corners of the globe. As companies and other entities struggle to navigate the broader macro-economic … Continue reading
In a last minute effort to avoid a government shutdown, on December 21, 2020 Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021.… Continue reading
A trademark infringement suit is not required to show willful infringement as a precondition to a disgorgement of the infringers’ profits.… Continue reading
On February 10, 2020, the Seventh Circuit federal appeals court ruled that an Illinois-based seller of dietary supplements could maintain a federal Lanham Act and Illinois state law claims against a California-based competitor that had only an online presence, and no physical presence in Illinois. (Curry v. Revolution Laboratories, LLC, 949 F,3d 385 (7th Cir. … Continue reading
Yesterday, Britain voted to leave the European Union. The exit will not happen immediately. It is likely to take at least two years after the process is actually triggered for the transition to be completed. For the time being it is business as usual. There is no immediate loss of Intellectual Property (IP) protection in the UK; … Continue reading
Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark trademark decision holding that TTAB rulings on likelihood of confusion can have preclusive effect in subsequent federal court infringement actions. B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc., No. 13-352, slip op. (U.S. Mar. 24, 2015) We previously reported on the 18-year fight between B&B Hardware and … Continue reading
Earlier this year, we wrote about the Ninth Circuit decision in Herb Reed Enterprises, LLC v. Florida Entertainment Management, Inc., in which the Ninth Circuit found that there is no presumption of irreparable harm in trademark preliminary injunction matters and concluded that the plaintiff must demonstrate irreparable harm to obtain a preliminary injunction in a … Continue reading
Recently, the US Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear a case that will determine what level of deference courts will give to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) decisions on the likelihood of confusion between trademarks. B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc., 716 F.3d 1020 (8th Cir. 2013), cert. granted, 2014 US LEXIS 4681, … Continue reading