The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held today (April 23, 2020) that a brand owner is not required to prove a defendant’s trademark infringement was willful as a precondition to an award of the defendant’s profits. The Court’s decision – Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc.[1] – vacated the decision of the Federal Circuit, which held that, under Second Circuit law, an award of profits could not be sustained for Romag’s failure to establish Fossil’s infringement was willful.[2] The Court’s decision resolves a Circuit split regarding the interpretation of Section 1117(a) of the Lanham Act, which states in pertinent part:
Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Rules that Profits Available Even from Non-Willful Trademark Infringers
Latest Post
More Posts
The Federal Circuit Reconsiders the Inherent Distinctiveness of Color Marks in In re Forney
Cesari S.R.L. v. Peju Province Winery L.P.: Relying on Supreme Court Precedent, District Court Holds that Trademark Trial & Appeal Board Finding of Likelihood of Confusion has Preclusive Effect
Warren Distribution, Inc. v. Royal Purple, LLC – What’s in a Name?
Summary of Recent Precedential Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Decisions
Summary of Recent Precedential Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Decisions
Summary of Recent Precedential Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Decisions
Summary of Recent Precedential Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Decisions
Are Circuit Courts of Appeals Split as to the Preclusive Impact Accorded to Prior Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Decisions?
Kraft v. Cracker Barrel: A Summary of Judge Posner’s Opinion and an Alternative Reverse Confusion Theory of Liability
Connect: http://www.sheppardmullin.com/pbost
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS