A Massachusetts federal court entered default on trademark claims but denied an injunction and monetary recovery because liability by default did not prove irreparable harm, actual damages, or profits.
A Rhode Island federal court dismissed false-association and false-advertising claims because the complaint alleged neither a misleading statement nor actionable consumer confusion.
A Northern District of California court allowed a Lanham Act false-advertising theory involving competing antioxidant skincare products to proceed while dismissing theories involving products that were not plausibly substitutes.
A Minnesota federal court refused to enter default judgment against an absent manufacturer while a related supplier actively contests the validity of the same livestock-prod trademarks.
A Texas federal court entered partial default judgment, awarded $200,000, and permanently enjoined a Houston-area drink seller from using Tropical Isle’s Hand Grenade word and product-design marks.
A Pennsylvania federal court held that Workers United plausibly alleged a live controversy over its Starbucks Workers United name and raised-fist logo, allowing its trademark and copyright declaratory claims to proceed.
An Illinois federal court enjoined an unlicensed rooftop business from selling views of Cubs games and using Cubs trademarks after its royalty agreement expired.
A Connecticut federal court held that LEGO could not establish fair use as a matter of law for copying an artist’s painted jacket onto a Queer Eye minifigure, while dismissing the artist’s trade-dress claim for lack of likely confusion.
A North Carolina federal court granted Ruger summary judgment because the SCAR and SFAR rifle marks were materially different and the remaining marketplace factors could not establish likely confusion.
A New York federal court entered a $169,000 default judgment and broad injunction over a copycat website, hijacked accounts, and unauthorized use of the EVERYDAYPPL marks.
The Ninth Circuit held that displaying third-party material in generic search results did not plead Google’s commercial use of the plaintiff’s name as a trademark.
A Massachusetts federal court reduced a trademark jury’s actual-damages award to $37,500 but accepted $15.4 million in equitable profit disgorgement against Beyond Meat.
A Florida federal court held that a Spanish streaming operator’s paid subscriptions, advertising, and substantial Florida traffic supported personal jurisdiction over Tencent’s copyright and trademark claims.
In a precedential ruling, the TTAB held that tribal sovereign immunity cannot block opposition or cancellation proceedings over federal trademark registrations.
An Eastern District of Pennsylvania judge awarded $975,000 after a jury found willful counterfeiting across two marks and three animal-rescue services plus cyberpiracy.
The EU General Court upheld refusal of ULTRADRY for golf bags because consumers would immediately understand the term as describing the bags’ ability to keep contents dry.
Similar marks did not establish likely confusion where fish-skin dog treats and medical dermatology occupied distinct markets, and delay defeated urgency.
Disputes over when accused sandal sales became commercially significant prevented summary judgment on laches.
An Ohio federal court held that factual disputes over abandonment and likely confusion require a trial in the Cheese Hog trademark dispute.
A D.C. federal court allowed MEANS Database’s challenge alleging that FOOD RECOVERY NETWORK marks are generic to proceed past the pleading stage.
The TTAB sustained Cielo e Terra’s opposition because identical wine goods and the dominant EL CIELO wording made confusion likely.
A Delaware federal court preliminarily barred Operation Bluebird from using TWITTER-formative marks, while finding that X likely abandoned the TWEET mark and bird logo.
The TTAB barred Lamar Jackson’s ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON application based on claim preclusion and lack of use on the listed bag products.
A Tennessee federal court awarded $276,283.35 in Lanham Act fees after trial testimony denying confusing use of STARSTRUCK was contradicted by the plaintiff’s own social-media marketing.
An Ohio federal court allowed a functionality challenge to a banded-knurl fastener mark to proceed but dismissed inadequately pleaded abandonment theories with leave to amend.
An Arizona federal court deemed a failed RAW-versus-Raw Garden trademark case exceptional and awarded the prevailing defendant roughly $2.56 million in attorneys’ fees.
The Fourth Circuit held that foreign-market Gilead drugs can be non-genuine under trademark law when their labeling and quality controls materially differ from authorized U.S. products.
The District of Columbia dismissed YMTC’s false-advertising claims because advocacy publications criticizing its China ties were not commercial speech, even if a competitor allegedly funded them.
The TTAB refused registration of SERENA VENTURES because it was likely to be confused with SERENA for overlapping financial and investment services.
The Ninth Circuit held that Jack Daniel’s failed to prove its famous marks were likely to be tarnished by VIP’s Bad Spaniels dog-toy parody.
The Eleventh Circuit held that invisible competitive keyword bidding alone is not trademark infringement and ordered a new damages trial.
The Ninth Circuit vacated a multimillion-dollar false-advertising recovery because a CEO’s salary was not his profit, while preserving the exceptional-case attorney-fee award.
The Third Circuit upheld a fudge-recipe trade-secret verdict and attorney-fee awards on unsuccessful trademark and copyright claims.
The Third Circuit held that Jiaherb failed to prove saw palmetto oil was adulterated, defeating its Lanham Act false-advertising and related contract claims.
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.
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 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.
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.