We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 86

Temporary restraining order to prevent competing, identical sales
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • April 3 2015

Venus Labs., Inc. dba Earth Friendly Prods. V. Vlahakis, No. 15 C 1617, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Mar. 5, 2015) (Blakey, J.). Judge Blakey granted


“Look and feel” of a website can constitute protectable trade dress
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • October 15 2014

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California, in Ingrid & Isabel, LLC v. Baby Be Mine, LLC, --- F. Supp. 3d ----, 2014 WL


Nominative fair use not decided on motion to dismiss
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • December 10 2014

Judge Lefkow denied defendant Elmwood's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) & (7) motion to dismiss plaintiff Slep-Tone's Lanham Act claims related to its


Trademark fraud claims cannot be dismissed before discovery
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • November 19 2014

Judge Guzman granted in part plaintiff Slep-Tone’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss defendant’s declaratory judgment


Court spares third-party service providers from contributory trademark infringement
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2014

Trademark owners frustrated by cybersquatting will not be able to sue third-party service providers for contributory infringement, according to a new


Fair use & likelihood of confusion doom Lanham Act claims
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • October 27 2014

Judge Kapala granted defendant WD-40 summary judgment as to Plaintiff’s Lanham Act and related state law claims regarding Plaintiff’s THE INHIBITOR


Third-party service providers not liable for contributory trademark infringement
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • December 10 2013

Trademark owners frustrated by cybersquatting will not be able to sue third-party service providers for contributory infringement, according to a


Limiting interrogatory language allows limited response
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • June 18 2014

Judge St. Eve granted in part defendant Electro Power’s motion to compel further interrogatory responses and denied Electro Power’s motion to compel


Descriptive trademark does not survive summary judgment
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • July 16 2014

The Court granted summary judgment for defendant in this Lanham Act case involving alleged trademark infringement regarding plaintiff’s BOX PACKAGING


Domain name squatting to gain leverage can trigger "bad faith intent" in an ACPA claim
  • Holland & Knight LLP
  • USA
  • January 31 2014

A required element to sustain a claim under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection (ACPA) (15 U.S.C. 1125(d)(1)(A)) is proof that the