, , , , , , , , ,

Plaintiffs have used the GILT trademark in connection with the sale of unique, sustainable, and hand-selected pieces of vintage and antique jewelry and related items since 1994. Around 2010-2011, Defendant began using the GILT mark in connection with jewelry, first for the sale of modern jewelry and later, in or about 2011-2012, in connection with the sale of estate jewelry.

In April 2012, Plaintiffs filed applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) to register GILT and GILT JEWELRY for “mail order services featuring jewelry; retail jewelry stores.” The USPTO issued office actions refusing registration, citing a likelihood of confusion with Defendant’s U.S. Trademark Registration Nos. 3920768 and 3967967 for GILT MAN and GILT MANUAL in connection with “On-line retail store services featuring luxury and fashion clothing, apparel, shoes, belts, clothing accessories, pens, lighters, desk sets, tie clips, cuff links, skin care products, jewelry, sports equipment, wine, liquor, and art sold at discount prices.”

Accordingly, Plaintiffs have brought this action for trademark infringement and several other claims, including cancellation of Defendant’s trademark registrations.

Gilt Inc. et al v. Gilt Groupe Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-01609-BR
File Date: Friday, October 10, 2014
Plaintiff: Gilt Inc., Paula Bixel
Plaintiff Counsel: John F. Neupert, Elizabeth A. Tedesco Milesnick of Miller Nash LLP
Defendant: Gilt Groupe Inc.
Cause: Infringement of Unregistered Mark, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, State Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation, Unjust Enrichment, Cancellation of Trademarks
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Anna J. Brown