Supreme court tackles extent of federal subject-matter jurisdiction over compulsory counterclaims in cases presenting abandoned claims *

USA - June 26 2012
On June 25, 2012, the United States Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari in Nike, Inc. v. Already, LLC, 663 F.3d 89 (2d Cir. 2011).

Co-authors: Jennifer D. Arkowitz, Stephen Feingold, William M. Bryner.

---

IP innovations class: recent developments in trademark and unfair competition law | Podcast *

USA - July 13 2011
In a reprise of his popular presentation at the International Trademark Association's annual meeting, Ted Davis discussed recent developments in trademark litigation and unfair competition law.

---

“A kind of rebuttable presumption:” the Sixth Circuit recognizes a strong inference of likely dilution by tarnishment and shifts the burden of production to defendants selling “sex-related products” *

USA - May 21 2010
On May 19, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the Trademark Dilution Revision Act (TDRA), which is codified in Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c) (2006), establishes a presumption-like inference of likely dilution by tarnishment where a defendant is using a mark similar to that of a plaintiff to sell sex-related products.

Co-authors: J. David Mayberry, William M. Bryner.

---

Second Circuit rules that the unauthorized removal of anticounterfeiting devices from otherwise genuine trademarked products is actionable as trademark infringement *

USA - June 23 2009
In Zino Davidoff SA v. CVS Corp., No. 07-2872-CV (June 19, 2009), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the sale of branded products from which a serial number applied for anticounterfeiting and quality control purposes has been removed constitutes trademark infringement under the Lanham Act.

Co-authors: Lisa Pearson, Robert N. Potter, Miles J. Alexander, Jerre B. Swann.

---

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board expands opportunities to cure alleged fraud in the procurement of registrations *

USA - May 26 2009
In a surprise move, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board has redesignated a formerly nonprecedential opinion as precedential, in the process expanding the options available to the owners of federal registrations at risk of being cancelled under the Board’s earlier decision in Medinol Ltd v. NeuroVasx Inc., 67 U.S.P.Q.2d 1205 (2003).

Co-authors: Laura C. Miller, William M. Bryner.

---