Tag Archives: Federal Trademark Infringement

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America v. TRB Acquisitions

12 Thursday Nov 2015

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

This adidas lawsuit involves its triangular “Badge of Sport Mark” and “RBK” trademarks. The alleged infringer is a New York-based company and its products are allegedly sold side-by-side with adidas products in retail stores. The Complaint shows a photograph allegedly taken at TJ Maxx.

Screen Shot 2015-11-12 at 8.21.22 AM

adidas America Inc. et al v. TRB Acquisitions LLC

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-02113
File Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG, Adidas International Marketing B.V., Reebok International Ltd.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: TRB Acquisitions LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, State Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael H. Simon

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America v. Cougar Sport

07 Wednesday Oct 2015

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

adidas is back with more “Three-Stripe” litigation, this time against Cougar Sport, a New York-based clothing company selling apparel with four stripes (2 light, 2 dark). adidas has a history of attempting to expand its “Three-Stripe” trademark rights beyond, well, just three stripes. Three can also mean 2 stripes and, if adidas has its way here, 4 stripes.

Screen Shot 2015-10-07 at 8.34.17 AM

Screen Shot 2015-10-07 at 8.36.05 AM

The Three-Stripe mark is so famous and distinctive, as adidas frequently reminds us in its Complaint, there must certainly be an argument made that consumers would immediately recognize that 2 and 4-stripe apparel are obviously NOT adidas products.

Earlier this year, fashion designer Marc Jacobs was set to test adidas’ rights to “four stripes,” but adidas voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit shortly after filing the Complaint. Perhaps Cougar Sport should hire Marc Jacobs’ attorneys…

adidas America Inc. et al v. Cougar Sport Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01856-SI
File Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: Cougar Sport Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael H. Simon

Complaint: 

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America et al v. Skechers USA

24 Thursday Sep 2015

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

adidas has a long history with Skechers. In 1994, adidas filed suit for trademark infringement over Skechers‘s Karl Kani footwear. The companies entered into a settlement agreement the following year (the “1995 Agreement,” attached below). Under this agreement, Skechers acknowledged that adidas is the exclusive owner of the THREE STRIPE DESIGN, agreed not to use the THREE STRIPE DESIGN or any mark confusingly similar thereto, and agreed to cease distribution of its KARL KANI sport shoe.

Between 2008 and 2013, adidas and Skechers allegedly entered into five separate confidential settlement agreements about infringements and dilutions of the Three-Stripe Mark. This most recent complaint from adidas claims that “notwithstanding the 1995 Agreement and the subsequent 2008-2013 Agreements–and in continuing, blatant disregard of adidas‘s rights–Skechers yet again is . . . selling footwear . . . bearing a confusingly similar imitation of the adidas Marks.”

adidas is especially aggrieved about a shoe that is (allegedly) confusingly similar to their famous Stan Smith shoe and claims that Skechers intends their “Stan Smith Knock-Off” shoe to be confusingly similar to the adidas Trade Dress and offers evidence that the Skechers website included the terms “stan smith” and “adidas original” in the source code.

adidas America Inc. et al v. Skechers USA Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01741-JE
File Date: Monday, September 14, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG, Adidas International Marketing B.V.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: Skechers USA Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark and Trade Dress Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark and Trade Dress Dilution, State Trademark Dilution with respect to the Three-Stripe Mark, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Breach of Contract
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge John Jelderks

Complaint:

1995 Agreement:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America v. Forever 21

18 Tuesday Aug 2015

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Adidas has filed a complaint alleging that clothing retailer, Forever 21, and clothing manufacturer/distributor, Central Mills, have been selling counterfeit adidas clothing. In the complaint, adidas alleges Defendants have been importing and selling “apparel bearing three stripes that constitute counterfeit and/or confusingly similar imitations of adidas’s Three-Stripe Mark,” and included pictures of two examples (see Complaint below).

In 2013, Forever 21 and Central Mills were sued by fashion photograher, Mark Hunter, for copyright infringement. Hunter alleged that Defendants used one of his photographs on clothing without authorization. That case was settled out of court less than four months after the complaint was filed.

adidas America Inc. et al v. Forever 21 Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01559
File Date: Monday, August 17, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: Forever 21 Inc., Central Mills Inc.
Cause: Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, State Trademark Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael H. Simon

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America v. Marc Jacobs International

09 Thursday Apr 2015

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Does trademark protection of Adidas’ famous “Three-Stripe Mark” also extend to four stripes? Fashion designer Marc Jacobs is ready to debate that question in Oregon federal court.

Some media coverage of the lawsuit, with images: de zeen, NY Post

Stay tuned for updates.

adidas America Inc. et al v. Marc Jacobs International LLC

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00582
File Date: Wednesday, April 08, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman, Kristina J. Holm of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: Marc Jacobs International LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, State Trademark Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Paul Papak

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Heidie S. McCall v. Ronny Shany et al

05 Thursday Feb 2015

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

This is a pro se trademark lawsuit involving a dispute between the owners of HIGHTV and HIGHTV 3D trademarks. The trademarks have been used concurrently since 2011.

Heidie S. McCall v. Ronny Shany et al

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00182-SI
File Date: Monday, February 02, 2015
Plaintiff: Heidie S. McCall
Plaintiff Counsel: Heidie S. McCall – Pro Se
Defendant: Ronny Shany, Eric Klein, HighTV 3D
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael H. Simon

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Rudy’s Barbershop v. Rudy’s Barber Shop

24 Wednesday Sep 2014

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Portland, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Plaintiff has been operating hairdressing salons under the RUDY’S mark since as early as 1992. Plaintiff’s first location was in Seattle, Washington and he has since opened fifteen (15) additional locations in Seattle, Portland, Oregon, Los Angeles, California and New York, New York. Plaintiff owns a federal registration for RUDY’S in connection with “Hairdressing Salons, Beauty Salons and Haircutting Services.”

Defendant has operated a barbershop called Rudy’s Barber Shop in Portland, Oregon since 2009.

According to the Complaint, Defendant has “on at least one occasion, received a telephone call from a customer of one of Plaintiff’s two Portland, Oregon locations seeking to make an appointment for services. Instead of re-directing the call to Plaintiff, Defendants informed Plaintiff’s customer that the specific stylist no longer worked at the store and, further, that the stylist was currently in a rehabilitation facility due to an abuse of drugs or alcohol.”

Rudy’s Barbershop LLC v. Rudy’s Barber Shop LLC et al

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-01481-MO
File Date: Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Plaintiff: Rudy’s Barber Shop LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Kevin M. Hayes of Klarquist Sparkman LLP
Defendant: Rudy’s Barber Shop LLC, Rudolph Valentino Martinez
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Intentional Interference with Business Relations
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael W. Mosman

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Legit Organics v. Celisac

15 Friday Aug 2014

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Legit Organics LLC v. Celisac LLC

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-01297
File Date: Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Plaintiff: Legit Organics LLC
Plaintiff Counsel:
Defendant: Celisac LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael W. Mosman

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Dynamic Measurement Group v. University of Oregon et al

13 Wednesday Aug 2014

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Dynamic Measurement Group Inc. v. University of Oregon et al

Court Case Number: 6:14-cv-01295-TC
File Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2014
Plaintiff: Dynamic Measurement Group Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Frederick A. Batson of Gleaves Swearingen Potter & Scott LLP
Defendant: University of Oregon, Mia Tuan, Edward J. Kame’enui, Francis J. Fien IV, Brad Shelton, Hop Skip Technologies Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Oregon State Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Copyright Infringement, Violation of Copyright Management Provisions, Injunctive Relief
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Coffin

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – AutoBidMaster v. Alpine Auto Gallery et al

11 Friday Jul 2014

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Plaintiff operates an online auction marketplace at the domain autobidmaster.com. Defendant, a competitor, began using the domain autobidmaser.com and autobidmater.com to redirect traffic to its own website.

AutoBidMaster LLC v. Alpine Auto Gallery LLC et al

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-01083
File Date: Monday, July 07, 2014
Plaintiff: AutoBidMaster LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Nathaniel L. Funk of Barker Martin PS
Defendant: Alpine Auto Gallery LLC, Vehiko LLC, Edward Agabs, John Does 1-5
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Trademark Dilution, Federal Cyberpiracy, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Unjust Enrichment, Action to Pierce Corporate Veil
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: John V. Acosta