Incontestable
Finnegan's monthly review of essential decisions, key developments, evolving trends in trademark law, and more.
Inaugural Issue - September 2008

Civil Cases

CG Roxane LLC v. Fiji Water Co.,
2008 WL 2782745 (N.D. Cal. 2008)

"Bottled at the Source" is not an indicator of source and was found to be generic, despite a registration based on secondary meaning.

Dessert Beauty, Inc. v. Fox,
2008 WL 2938060 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)

Use of "love potion" on fragrance packaging constitutes descriptive fair use and does not infringe rights in registered LOVE POTION trademark.

Soilworks, LLC v. Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc.,
2008 WL 3286975 (D. Ariz. 2008)

Use of competitor's trademark in keyword and metatags is a use in commerce and constitutes infringement based on initial-interest confusion.

Surefoot LC v. Sure Foot Corp.,
531 F.3d 1236 (10th Cir. 2008)

Pending TTAB proceedings paired with years-old, unpursued claims of infringement may create declaratory judgment jurisdiction post-MedImmune.

Zobmondo Entertainment, LLC v. Falls Media, LLC,
(C.D. Cal. 2008)

Lack of bona fide intent as of filing date of intent-to-use application or in extension request cannot form basis for fraud claim under Section 38 of the Lanham Act.
PDF version

Finnegan Articles
Japonais Restaurant Name and Concept Do Not Have to Go Back to Sweet Home Chicago

Statutory Damages Under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act

Implementation of the Madrid Protocol in India: A Convenient Way to Protect Trademarks Internationally


A New Dilemma for Plaintiffs in Counterfeiting Actions: Statutory Damages vs. Attorney Fees
TTAB Cases

Gap (Apparel), LLC v. Gap One Enterprises, LLC,
Opposition No. 91172505 (TTAB 2008)

Likelihood of confusion found between GAP for retail clothing stores and clothing and GAP ONE for marketing services based on fame of GAP mark, relatedness of parties' goods and services, and similarities between the marks.

In-N-Out Burger, Inc. v. BB&R Spirits Ltd.,
Opposition No. 92048909 (TTAB 2008)

Initial disclosures in TTAB action must be sufficiently detailed and specific to address parties' claims and defenses, as well as individual factors used to evaluate each claim and defense.


DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is intended to convey general information only and should not be construed as a legal opinion or as legal advice. The firm disclaims liability for any errors or omissions and readers should not take any action that relies upon the information contained in this newsletter. You should consult your own lawyer concerning your own situation and any specific legal questions. This promotional newsletter does not establish any form of attorney-client relationship with our firm or with any of our attorneys.