Experience
Marilyn D. Mintz
Subaru of America, Inc.
At the lower court, Finnegan prevailed on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion for client Subaru of America. In that suit, the plaintiff asserted trademark and copyright infringement, trademark dilution, and false advertising against Subaru’s annual “Share the Love” holiday-season campaign, which donates money from car purchases to various buyer-designated national and local charities. Subaru’s campaign uses a particular logo comprised of a heart on a hand, and various other “love”-themed designs.
The plaintiff sought enhanced damages, punitive damages over $20 million, and attorneys’ fees. Subaru’s motion to dismiss was based largely on the facial dissimilarities between the parties’ respective designs, which the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted on all counts asserted in the complaint, without leave to further amend.
The plaintiff appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which affirmed the lower court’s decision after finding that the plaintiff did not plausibly allege any claim. The appeals court later denied plaintiff’s petition for rehearing. Consistent with the lower court’s opinion, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the marks at issue were so facially dissimilar that they could not plausibly create a likelihood of confusion, and affirmed the dismissal of the trademark dilution, copyright infringement, and false advertising claims for the same reasons, resulting in a complete win for Subaru.
Marilyn D. Mintz v. Subaru of America, Inc., 16-16840, 9th Cir., Judges Lucero, Owens, Thomas
Marilyn D. Mintz v. Subaru of America, Inc., 3:16-cv-03384, N.D. Cal., Judge Chesney
Juniper Networks
Finnegan achieves trademark victory on laches for MMA Team Quest gyms
Matthew Lindland; Team Quest Fight Club LLC
Rembrandt Patent Innovations, LLC and Rembrandt Secure Computing, LP v. Apple Inc.
Rembrandt Patent Innovations, LLC; Rembrandt Secure Computing
Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC
Fox Factory, Inc.
Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC
Fox Factory, Inc.
Asia Vital Components Co., Ltd. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
Asetek Danmark A/S
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.