A Florida federal court adopts a magistrate’s recommendation and enters a $14.6 million statutory damages judgment against 73 online sellers of counterfeit Trump-branded merchandise under the Lanham Act’s counterfeiting provisions.
Judge Komitee awards Van Leeuwen $23,785,000 in disgorgement of Rebel Creamery’s profits and issues a permanent packaging redesign injunction after finding that Rebel’s ice cream packaging infringed Van Leeuwen’s distinctive minimalist trade dress under the Lanham Act and New York law.
The EU General Court ruled that ‘OPENAI’ cannot be registered as an EU trademark because it descriptively conveys ‘openly accessible artificial intelligence’ — a potentially far-reaching ruling for AI companies seeking trademark protection in Europe.
The Tenth Circuit reversed dismissal of Lanham Act false advertising claims, holding that Hill’s Pet Nutrition’s website statements and veterinary education materials could constitute actionable commercial speech when they allegedly disparaged grain-free competitors—and that the “establishment claim doctrine” allows courts to probe whether cited science actually supports the marketing claims made.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction against a Dutch software company’s use of an American company’s brand and trade secrets, holding that Abitron Austria’s conduct-focused test for the territorial reach of U.S. IP law is satisfied where the defendant directly targeted U.S. customers online.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for MillerKnoll, holding that the Nelson family authorized the company’s ownership of the iconic George Nelson Bubble Lamp trademarks through a 2006 royalty agreement — and in a precedential ruling, confirmed that authorization defeats unregistered trademark infringement claims under Lanham Act § 1125(a).
A Pennsylvania federal court dismissed Pearl’s trade dress claim for its marching band drum carrier design without prejudice, holding that Pearl’s own utility patent on the same design features provided strong evidence of functionality, defeating trade dress protection.
A federal magistrate judge recommended $14.6 million in statutory damages against online retailers who sold counterfeit merchandise bearing TRUMP and MAGA trademarks after they defaulted by failing to respond to the lawsuit.
The Delhi High Court Division Bench dismissed ITC Limited’s bid to block a former hotel licensee from continuing to use the Dakshin restaurant trademark, finding that the licensee had built independent goodwill through decades of use and that ITC’s prolonged silence amounted to acquiescence.
The Federal Circuit affirms the TTAB’s refusal to register four ‘Mon Ami’ dog-treat marks, finding the Board’s likelihood-of-confusion analysis under DuPont factor one is supported by substantial evidence.
A magistrate judge recommended a $68 million default judgment against 26 defendants who operated a large-scale scheme to flood the U.S. supply chain with counterfeit Biktarvy and Descovy HIV medications bearing Gilead’s registered trademarks.
A Manhattan federal judge denies Emojico’s trademark TRO against Schedule A e-commerce defendants, finding the accused products — shower curtains, earbuds, karaoke machines — look nothing like Emojico’s stylized smiley-face marks.
The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether a trademark’s inherent or conceptual strength is a question of fact for juries or law for judges — a ruling that could reshape summary judgment practice in trademark infringement cases.
A federal judge issued a TRO on June 26, 2026, blocking a China-based phishing-as-a-service network that weaponized Google Gemini to build fake banking and government websites, finding the ring ‘threatened the security of the internet’ and infringed Google’s Lanham Act trademarks.
The TTAB affirmed in part the USPTO’s refusal to register a blue-and-white stripe trade dress for frozen treat products, finding the design ornamental and commonly used in the industry, while reversing on some narrower grounds.
In a precedential ruling, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board affirmed the USPTO’s refusal to register ‘WEMBY’ for athletic apparel, finding the mark falsely suggests a connection with NBA star Victor Wembanyama and identifies him without his consent.
The TTAB refused registration of WEMBY for athletic apparel, finding the mark falsely suggests a connection with NBA star Victor Wembanyama and identifies a living individual without written consent — applying In re Foster to consider post-filing evidence in the false suggestion analysis.
A Louisiana federal judge denied Total90 LLC’s preliminary injunction bid against Nike, holding that a lapsed trademark registration does not constitute abandonment when the registrant continues active commercial use — a reminder that trademark rights flow from use, not paperwork.
The Eleventh Circuit reversed summary judgment for a rival cheerleading event organizer, holding that genuine fact issues exist about whether USASF’s “THE CHEERLEADING WORLDS” and “WORLDS” marks are descriptive with acquired secondary meaning rather than generic.
A D.C. federal judge refused to dismiss the NRA’s trademark claims against its own charitable arm, ruling that the NRA’s cease-and-desist letter plausibly revoked the consent it had previously given the Foundation to use the NRA name and marks.
The Supreme Court declined to review the Federal Circuit’s ruling that an acquirer of common law trademark rights can cancel a later federal registration — even when those common law rights were acquired after the inter partes cancellation proceeding had already begun.
The Supreme Court declined to review VPX’s challenge to a $272 million Lanham Act false advertising verdict won by Monster Energy over Bang energy drinks’ “Super Creatine” claims, finalizing one of the largest false advertising verdicts in U.S. history.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed that a retroactive OFAC license validated Cubaexport’s 2005 trademark renewal fee payment for the HAVANA CLUB mark, upholding the USPTO Director’s decision to accept the long-delayed renewal and dealing Bacardi another setback in the decadeslong rum trademark battle.
A Southern District of New York judge dismissed a trademark infringement suit by New York radio host Maurice Watts against Amazon Studios over use of the name ‘The Love Zone’ in Amazon’s crime thriller series ‘Cross,’ finding no evidence that the fictional reference misled viewers about the source of the real radio show.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed a $739,500 trademark judgment in favor of Grunt Style LLC, finding that Grunt Style’s use of the Army motto ‘This We’ll Defend’ since 2011 gave it common-law priority over TWD, LLC’s 2014 use and 2015 federal registration.
A Northern District of Illinois judge granted Ty Inc.’s motion for a preliminary injunction blocking Pop Mart from selling its ‘Pucky’ collectible figurine line, finding that Pop Mart’s products likely infringe and dilute Ty’s famous Beanie Baby trademark and trade dress.
The Eighth Circuit held that federal trademark claims under the Lanham Act fell within a forum selection clause requiring state court litigation, affirming that state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over Lanham Act suits.
The Second Circuit vacated summary judgment for a California winery in an Italian competitor’s trademark suit, holding that a 2004 TTAB decision did not have preclusive effect under B&B Hardware because the TTAB had never considered the parties’ actual marketplace usage.
India’s Delhi High Court Division Bench reversed a single-judge injunction against Intas Pharmaceuticals’ BEVATAS cancer drug, holding that the INN-derived prefix ‘BEV/BEVA’ is publici juris and that ten years of concurrent market use with no actual confusion disproved likelihood of confusion with Sun Pharma’s BEVETEX.
Case: NETGEAR, Inc. v. Choice Electronics Inc., No. 25-cv-02601-RS (N.D. Cal. June 5, 2026) Judge: Chief Judge Richard Seeborg Opinion:
The Sixth Circuit affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction against P&G’s Spruce weed killer, holding that Scotts failed to prove its Miracle-Gro green-and-yellow trade dress was distinctive enough to support a likelihood of confusion.
A federal judge in the Western District of Washington denied a joint motion to enter a consent judgment and permanent injunction settling Eli Lilly’s trademark claims over its Mounjaro and Zepbound weight-loss drugs, finding the proposed decree and injunction “overbroad.”
A California federal court granted a preliminary injunction barring Chinese wellness device maker Xiamen Olymate from using the “OlyLife” brand, finding the name creates a false connection to the Olympic Games in violation of the Olympic and Amateur Sports Act.
The U.S. International Trade Commission has instituted a Section 337 investigation into gray market Monster Energy drinks imported by 13 respondents, alleging trademark infringement through the sale of products manufactured exclusively for foreign markets.
A Virginia federal court granted a temporary restraining order blocking political news site NOTUS from rebranding as ‘The Star,’ finding the Washington Star newspaper demonstrated a likelihood of trademark confusion.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in CareDx v. Natera, leaving intact the Third Circuit’s ruling that proof of actual consumer deception is required to support Lanham Act damages even when advertising is deliberately and literally false.
A federal court ordered two fake “Fisher Investments Europe” websites shut down and their domains transferred, finding cybersquatting liability under the ACPA and ruling that in rem domain actions require no showing of bad faith.
The Seventh Circuit ruled that email service on Chinese defendants in Schedule A trademark counterfeiting cases is improper under the Hague Service Convention, but remanded for the district court to determine whether the Convention applies.
Orange County Superior Court dismisses four federal trademark cancellation counts without leave to amend, holding that newly added Bus. & Prof. Code section 17500 and 17200 claims are merely repackaged ownership disputes that do not qualify as causes of action ‘involving a trademark registration’ under 15 U.S.C. section 1119.
The Federal Court of Australia reversed a trademark opposition decision, finding that On Clouds’ and Cyclonic’s footwear marks are deceptively similar based on combined visual, aural, and conceptual similarities relating to the shared idea of a ‘cyclone.’
A federal judge denied PhillyWine LLC’s emergency motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to stop the Wine School of Philadelphia from using the ‘Philly Wine School’ trademark, finding the challenger showed only sporadic prior use of the name.
The Delhi High Court issued a permanent injunction against Google and awarded damages, holding that Google’s auction of the registered trademark ‘HINDWARE’ as a biddable keyword in its Ads program constitutes trademark infringement and that Google does not qualify for safe harbour protection as an intermediary.
A federal court in the Eastern District of California dismissed trademark infringement claims involving the ALIEN mark for nicotine products after the plaintiff failed, even on a second attempt, to adequately plead priority of use over the defendant’s ALIENLABS mark for cannabis products.
The First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office dismissed an appeal against refusal to register “MICKEY IS FREE!” as an EU trademark for clothing, finding that despite the applicant’s public-domain commentary intent, average consumers would focus on “MICKEY” and associate it with Disney.
A New Jersey federal court denied a preliminary injunction in a dispute between competing waterfront restaurants, holding that a restaurant logo known only in a regional market is not ‘famous’ enough for federal trademark dilution protection.
An Ohio federal court entered a $1 million default judgment against a convicted counterfeiter who placed unauthorized NIJ certification marks on body armor sold to law enforcement, ordering permanent injunction and destruction of infringing goods.
An Oregon federal court partially dismissed adidas’s trademark infringement claims, holding that plaintiffs must identify which specific registered marks are infringed rather than pleading a ‘unitary branding device’ across multiple registrations.
The EU General Court annulled EUIPO’s decision refusing to invalidate a Polish entrepreneur’s ‘Obelix’ trademark registration for firearms and ammunition, finding the office failed to properly assess the famous comic character mark’s reputation and the risk of reputational damage.
A federal judge awarded $74,950 in attorney’s fees and $17,670 in costs against LegalForce after finding the trademark firm alleged facts it knew to be false, including $10 million in promotional spending it could not substantiate with even one dollar.
The EU General Court annuls EUIPO’s decision that allowed a Polish entrepreneur to keep the ‘Obelix’ trademark for firearms and ammunition, finding the agency failed to properly assess the famous comic character’s trademark reputation.