This post is the first of four looking at the decision of Smith J in Lidl & another v Tesco & another [2023] EWHC 873 (Ch). It will focus on the s.10(3) trade mark infringement elements of the…
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…
A long legal battle over the status of “the greatest of all cheeses,” comes to an apparent end.
A federal court in Virginia correctly relied on standards of identity written by the Food and Drug…
Like many companies in the fashion industry, Christian Louboutin did not seek design patent protection for its shoe designs in Brazil. The red sole trademark application was filed in 2009 in Brazil,…
The Chinese company acted with the requisite bad faith under the ACPA when it bought and re-registered the domain name, which was identical to several registered trademarks owned by the insurance and…
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…
“To grant trade-dress protection for Pocket Plus,” the court said, “would be to hand it a monopoly over the ‘best’ portable-pouch design,” which trademark law precludes.
In a trade-dress infringement…
A district court was too hasty in rejecting the safe distance rule.
A federal district court in Detroit must reconsider its decision to allow the Indian maker of an off-road vehicle to release a…
The district court erred in considering the failure to produce evidence of actual confusion at this preliminary stage, but the error did not affect the outcome.
The U.S. District Court for the…
