Category Archives: trademark

trade dress must be visual; Octane Fitness applies to Lanham Act

Fair Wind Sailing, Inc. v. Dempster, Nos. 13-3305 & 14-1572, — F.3d – (3d Cir. Sept. 4, 2014) Fair Wind, a sailing school, sued Virgin Island Sailing School (VISS) and its co-founder Scott Dempster, alleging trade dress infringement and unjust … Continue reading

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment

Wells Fargo can’t show irreparable harm from lost control of goodwill

A great example of why trademark owners are nervous about facing eBay. Wells Fargo and Co. v. ABD Insurance and Financial Services, Inc., 2014 WL 4312021, No. C 12–3856  (N.D. Cal. Aug. 28, 2014) The district court previously denied Wells … Continue reading

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment

religious catalog doesn’t have a prayer on trade dress claims

Gerffert Co., Inc. v. Dean, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2014 WL 4258275, No. 09–CV–266 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 29, 2014) Gerffert sued Dean for infringement of its trade dress in catalogs for religious products, catalogs that featured the “iconic” artwork of Fratelli Bonella, … Continue reading

Posted in trademark | Leave a comment

Irreparable harm after Herb Reed

E. & J. Gallo Winery v. Grenade Beverage LLC, No. 1:13-cv-00770 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 15, 2014) Via the Trademark Blog, this case applying Herb Reed but finding irreparable harm based on the same reasoning rejected in Herb Reed shows just … Continue reading

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment

taking control: Honeywell TM, ad claims lose, (c) continue

Honeywell International Inc. v. ICM Controls Corp., No. 11–569, 2014 WL 4248434 (D. Minn. Aug. 27, 2014) Honeywell sued ICM for patent infringement, copyright infringement, violation of the Lanham Act, and violation of state law.  (I will ignore the patent … Continue reading

Posted in copyright, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment

#1 with a bullet: Nutribullet wins false advertising claim, but its green isn’t inherently distinctive

Homeland Housewares, LLC v. Euro-Pro Operating LLC, 2014 WL 4187982, No. CV 14–03954 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2014) Homeland and Euro-Pro compete in the home blender market. Homeland sells three Nutribullet products: Classic, Sport, and Pro.  Euro-Pro sells Ninja blenders, … Continue reading

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment

Presumed irreparable: 3d Circuit applies eBay to all Lanham Act claims

Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., — F.3d —-, 2014 WL 4194094, No. 13–2290 (3d Cir. Aug. 26, 2014) This case had an INTA amicus brief making the trademark bar’s strongest arguments for Lanham Act exceptionalism, which here means … Continue reading

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, remedies, trademark | Leave a comment

I’ll give you four factors, and the last three don’t count: Lovelace film is fair use

Arrow Productions, LTD. v. Weinstein Company LLC, No. 13 Civ. 5488 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2014) Someday I might stop blogging copyright fair use and trademark defendant wins on the pleadings, but today is not that day.  Also, I appreciate the … Continue reading

Posted in dilution, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment

Lexmark applied to false association claims under 43(a)(1)(A)

Lundgren v. Ameristar Credit Solutions, Inc., 2014 WL 4079962, No. 3:12–263 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 18, 2014) Ameristar is a “debt settlement and tax resolution business,” while Lundgren “was previously in the mortgage service industry and began offering tax resolution services … Continue reading

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, standing, trademark | Leave a comment

Dastar-ing about architecture: 7th Circuit reverses dismissal of credit claim

M. Arthur Gensler Jr. & Associates, Inc. v. Strabala, No. 12-2256 (7th Cir. Aug. 21, 2014) Previous coverage, wherein I was not enthusiastic about the district court decision finding that there couldn’t be a §43(a) claim based on an allegedly … Continue reading

Posted in dastar, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment