• About
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer
  • Oregon IP Resources

Oregon Intellectual Property Blog

Oregon Intellectual Property Blog

Tag Archives: Trademark Infringement

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Sazerac Company v. Hood River Distillers

21 Friday Dec 2012

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Passing Off, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Dennis J. Hubel, Federal Trade Dress Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Litigation Update, Trademark Infringement

Sazerac Company, Inc. v. Hood River Distillers Inc

Court Case Number: 3:12-cv-02304-HU
File Date: Thursday, December 20, 2012
Plaintiff: Sazerac Company, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Lori F. Mayall, Peter J. Willsey, Scott P. Zoppoth, Todd S. Bontemps of Cooley LLP
Defendant: Hood River Distillers Inc
Defendant Counsel: Robert D. Scholz, Megan L. Ferris of MacMillan, Scholz & Marks PC
Cause: Trademark Infringement; Federal Unfair Competition; Federal Trade Dress Infringement; Common Law Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, and Passing Off
Court: Oregon District Court
Judge: Magistrate Judge Dennis J. Hubel

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaim:

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Peace for Paul Foundation v. Andrew Young

18 Friday May 2012

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

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Anti-Cybersquatting Protection Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Defamation, Intentional Interference with Economic Relations, Paul Papak, Trademark Infringement

Peace for Paul Foundation, Inc. v. Mr. Andrew Young

Court Case Number:    3:12-cv-00887-PK
File Date:    Thursday, May 17, 2012
Plaintiff:     Peace for Paul Foundation, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel:     David L. Silverman – Attorney at Law
Defendant:     Mr. Andrew Young
Cause:    Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Anti-Cybersquatting Protection Act, Trademark Infringement, Defamation, Intentional Interference with Economic Relations
Court:    Oregon District Court
Judge:     Magistrate Judge Paul Papak

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Too Marker Products v. Creation Supply

26 Thursday Apr 2012

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anna J. Brown, Trade Dress Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

Too Marker Products, Inc. et al v. Creation Supply Inc. et al

Court Case Number:    3:12-cv-00735-BR
File Date:    Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Plaintiff:     Too Marker Products, Inc., Imagination International, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel:     Timothy S. DeJong, Jacob S. Gill of Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Shlachter, PC
Defendant:     Creation Supply Inc., John Gragg
Cause:    Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Trade Dress Infringement
Court:    Oregon District Court
Judge:     Judge Anna J. Brown

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Metal-Tech Cage v. Jason DeMello

22 Wednesday Feb 2012

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

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Janice M. Stewart, Klarquist Sparkman, Metal-Tech Cage, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

Metal-Tech Cage, LLC v. Jason DeMello et al

Court Case Number: 3:12-cv-00308-ST
File Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Plaintiff: Metal-Tech Cage, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Kevin M. Hayes of Klarquist Sparkman LLP
Defendant: Jason DeMello, DeMello Offroad
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Sportsgrants v. Crossfit

04 Saturday Feb 2012

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Trademark Infringement, Crossfit, Federal Trademark Dilution, Michael H. Simon, Sportsgrants, Trademark Infringement, Williamson & Wyatt

Sportsgrants, Inc. v. Crossfit, Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 3:12-cv-00196-SI                                                     
File Date:
Friday, February 03, 2012
Plaintiff:
Sportsgrants, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel:
Michael A. Cohen, Matthew R. Wilmot Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, P.C.
Defendant:
Crossfit, Inc., Does 1 through 10
Cause:
Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Dilution
Court: 
District Court of Oregon
Judge:
Judge Michael H. Simon

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Adidas America v. Shoe Shoe Express

13 Tuesday Dec 2011

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adidas, Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Dilution, Inc., John V. Acosta, Perkins Coie, Shoe Express, State Trademark Dilution, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Unfair Trade Practices

Adidas America, Inc et al v. Shoe Shoe Express, Inc. et al

Plaintiff Adidas is suing Defendant for selling apparel that allegedly infringes upon the Three-Stripe Mark and 3-Bars logo.

Related case: Adidas v. Preschoolians

Court Case Number: 3:11-cv-01501-AC
File Date: Monday, December 12, 2011
Plaintiff: Adidas America, Inc, adidas AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie, LLP
Defendant: Shoe Shoe Express, Inc., Luis A. Gonzalez
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting, Unfair Competition, Unfair Trade Practices, Federal Trademark Dilution, State Trademark Dilution
Court:
 District Court of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Adidas v. Preschoolians Co.

06 Tuesday Dec 2011

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adidas, Ann L. Aiken, Deceptive Trade Practices, Federal Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation, Preschoolians Co., State Trademark Dilution, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Unfair Trade Practices

Adidas America, Inc et al v. Preschoolians Company et al

Adidas has brought this lawsuit to prevent Preschoolians from manufacturing and selling shoes bearing confusingly similar two-, three-, and four-stripe imitations of Adidas’s Three-Stripe Mark.

 

Court Case Number: 3:11-cv-01459-AA
File Date: Monday, December 05, 2011
Plaintiff: Adidas America, Inc., Adidas, AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie, LLP
Defendant: Preschoolians Company, Jeffrey Silverman
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Federal Trademark Dilution, State Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation
Court: District Court of Oregon
Judge: Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Metal-Tech Cage v. John Sundquist

18 Friday Nov 2011

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anna J. Brown, Kevin M. Hayes, Metal-Tech Cage, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

Metal-Tech Cage v. John Sundquist

Court Case Number: 3:11-cv-01394-BR
File Date: Thursday, November 17, 2011
Plaintiff: Metal-Tech Cage, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Kevin M. Hayes of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP
Defendant: John Sundquist
Cause: Unfair Competition, Trademark Infringement
Court: District Court of Oregon
Judge: Judge Anna J. Brown

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Legacy Health v. Legacy Health Group

13 Sunday Nov 2011

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anna J. Brown, False Advertising, State Trademark Dilution, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Washington Consumer Protection Act

Legacy Health v. Legacy Health Group, LLC et al

Legacy Health, an Oregon nonprofit corporation (Plaintiff), has been a high-quality provider of medical services in the Portland area for over two decades. In this case, they hope to prevent the defendants, a Utah-based LLC and related parties, from using the LEGACY mark in connection with homeopathic diet products.

Court Case Number: 3:11-cv-01327-BR
File Date: Friday, November 04, 2011
Plaintiff: Legacy Health
Plaintiff Counsel: Randolph C. Foster, Steven E. Klein of Stoel Rives LLP
Defendant: Legacy Health Group, LLC; Charlie Wayne Estes; DOES 1 through 25
Cause: Trademark Infringement; False Advertising and Unfair Competition; Cyberpiracy; Violation of Washington Consumer Protection Act
Court: District Court of Oregon
Judge: Judge Anna J. Brown

View this document on Scribd

Avoiding Loss of Trademark Rights

08 Tuesday Nov 2011

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Trademark Infringement, Trademark Rights

trademarkYou’ve spent time, energy and money developing and protecting your trademark…possibly even obtaining a federal trademark registration. Now what? Moving forward, you need to be careful to avoid several pitfalls that can result in the loss of your valuable trademark rights. Set forth below are several important considerations you should think about to avoid losing your rights as you continue to use your trademark and enforce your trademark rights against third parties:

1. Failure to use the trademark. Since trademark rights are based on use, a trademark owner must continue to use the trademark properly in order to avoid forfeiture of rights by abandonment. Non-use occurs when a trademark owner stops using the mark and does not intend to resume use. Further, intention not to resume use may be inferred from a trademark owner’s failure to use the mark for two consecutive years. Once a mark is deemed abandoned, all rights to it are lost.

2. Authorizing uncontrolled use of the trademark. Trademark rights can be lost if you license the trademark to others but don’t take adequate steps to monitor the style and quality of products or services associated with the trademark. After all, trademark law grants you exclusive use of the trademark in exchange for giving the consuming public a reliable indication of quality. If the level of quality falls below a certain level, you may be setting yourself up for cancellation of your trademark right.

3. Failure to enforce your rights against infringers. If you continually allow known infringers to violate your trademark rights, you effectively give up the right to challenge their use. While this might not result in cancellation of your registration, you are undermining your trademark by wilfully adopting a very narrow scope of protection.

4. Generic use. Generic use refers to the situation in which a trademark becomes so familiar that the distinction of the mark diminishes. We’re all familiar with the following trademarks which were allowed to become generic over time: aspirin, escalator, and linoleum. Rights to those trademarks were lost because appropriate steps were not taken to prevent the public from coming to regard the marks as generic products or services, rather than particular brand names.

If you have concerns about whether you are adequately protecting your trademarks, consider consulting a trademark professional who can help you implement procedures for maintaining and enforcing your rights.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Categories

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Oregon Intellectual Property Blog
    • Join 147 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Oregon Intellectual Property Blog
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...