In Jack Daniels Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, (slip. op. No. 22-148, June 8, 2023), the United States Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit, ruling that a “Bad Spaniels” dog toy designed to look like a Jack Daniels...more
6/12/2023
/ Cease and Desist ,
Dilution ,
First Amendment ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Jack Daniels Properties Inc v VIP Products LLC ,
Lanham Act ,
Likelihood of Confusion ,
Parody ,
Rogers Test ,
SCOTUS ,
Trade Dress ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks
Is an unused registered trademark preventing you from clearing or registering your mark? Or was the blocking registration filed for goods or services that were not in use when the registrant declared that they were? As we...more
On December 27, 2020, the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (“the Act”) became law as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021. Among other changes, the Act includes important amendments to the Lanham Act...more
1/13/2021
/ Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA) ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Irreparable Harm ,
Lanham Act ,
Trademark Cancellation ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Modernization Act (TMA) ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks
The Supreme Court unanimously held this week that Lucky Brand was not precluded from mounting a new defense in its litigation with Marcel Fashions Group — despite having chosen not to bring up the same defense in a prior...more
5/15/2020
/ Claim Preclusion ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Counterclaims ,
Defense Preclusion ,
Fashion Branding ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Lucky Brand Dungarees v Marcel Fashion Group ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Release Agreements ,
Res Judicata ,
SCOTUS ,
Split of Authority ,
Subsequent Litigation ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks
In a unanimous decision, the US Supreme Court held that a trademark owner need not prove willful infringement in order to seek lost profits from a trademark infringer. The case, Romag Fasteners Inc. v. Fossil Inc. et al.,...more
4/24/2020
/ § 1125(a) ,
§ 1125(c) ,
Appeals ,
Burden of Proof ,
Charge-Filing Preconditions ,
Compensatory Awards ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Dilution ,
Lanham Act ,
Lost Profits ,
Remand ,
Remedies ,
Romag Fasteners v Fossil ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Vacated ,
Willful Infringement
This year the Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the Circuit Courts penned a number of opinions impacting trademark law. Here are some key takeaways from the past year...more
Relatives of the late conservative political activist, Phyllis Schlafly, lost their appeal to prevent the Saint Louis Brewery, LLC (“the Brewery”) from trademarking the Schlafly name in connection with various beer products...more