Category: Marketing Expert Witness
-
Experts could rely on reliable “other sources” and even hearsay to offer their opinions; Court notes before admitting part of Marketing Expert Witness’ testimony
The lawsuit was a trademark infringement action filed by Forest River, Inc. against inTech Trailers, Inc. It sought injunctive relief, damages, costs, attorneys’ fees, and any other appropriate remedies. The legal action arose from inTech’s knowing and intentional infringement of Forest River’s DELLA TERRA trademark and its mountain design trademark, (“Forest River Mountain Design”) (Forest…
-
Court limits testimony of Marketing Expert Witness citing lack of experience analyzing consumer confusion from either a legal or marketing perspective in trademark infringement suit
In the case involving Plaintiff Blue Bottle Coffee, LLC and Defendants Southern Technologies, LLC and Hui Chuan Liao, the Plaintiff, a coffee business, filed a lawsuit in August 2021 and an amended complaint in November 2021. The dispute centered on alleged trademark infringement and unfair competition claims. The Plaintiff held multiple registered trademarks, including two…
-
Court rejects expert testimony on unfair trade practices and consumer expectations regarding deodorants and antiperspirants; Closes Case
The Court granted Unilever’s motion to exclude expert testimony on unfair trade practices and consumer expectations regarding deodorants and antiperspirants after finding deficiencies in both the experts’ facts, data, and methodology. The sample sizes were too small and the data was ambiguous and incomplete. The testing methodology also yielded unpredictable results. Consumer expectations relevant to…
-
Court admits image valuation and consumer perception theories with regard to the model and talent industry provided by the Plaintiff’s experts in copyright infringement suit
Wisconsin District Court denied a motion to exclude the Plaintiffs’ expert who used his industry experience to opine on hypothetical negotiation value. The court found his valuation method reliable enough for admission, despite the Defendant’s critiques. It also permitted the Plaintiffs’ survey expert, ruling that flaws in the survey went to evidentiary weight, not admissibility.…
