Tag: Trademark
-
Marketing Expert Witness Allowed to Testify Despite Her Relative Inexperience in the Field of Trademark Law
This case concerns use of the term “XHALE” in connection with identical retail smoke shop services, marketing through the same channels, to the same customer base, and in Hattiesburg, on the same street, resulting in rampant actual confusion. Plaintiff Green Rush, LLC, d/b/a Xhale City claims that its federal trademark registration for “XHALE CITY” not…
-
Survey Research Expert Witness’ Testimony Admitted Because the Court Found No Evidence of Actual Confusion among Respondents
In this trademark dispute, Defendants SuccessfulMatch.com and Successful Match Canada (both, Successful Match) sought to cancel on genericness grounds the registration of trademarks asserted by Plaintiffs Clover8 Investments and Reflex Media, Inc. As Successful Match puts it, the trademarks in question “are used in connection with seeking a companion in the ‘Sugar Daddy’ and ‘Sugar…
-
Intellectual Property Expert Witness’ Testimony About Trademark Custom and Usage Admitted
This is a trademark infringement case involving the trademarked phrase “Freedom Pop”. Plaintiff Proccor Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Proccor”) contended that Defendant GAT Sports infringed upon its alleged trademark for a “Freedom Pop” flavored Pre-Rx pre-workout supplement. GAT Sports essentially argued that the phrase was used in a non-trademark, descriptive, way to describe the flavor of its…
-
Accounting Expert Witness Barred from Testifying because He Used Simple Addition to Derive Infringing Sales
Plaintiff, a prominent telecommunications service provider, has established the well-known marks “LIGHTSPEED” and “LIGHTSPEED VOICE” in connection with its telecommunications services. When Defendant opened a business called LIGHTSPEED CONSTRUCTION GROUP, Plaintiff alleged that the mark was nearly identical to its marks in connection with the offering of confusingly similar telecommunications services. Plaintiff added that such…
-
Market Research Expert Witness’ Testimony Deemed Admissible Because of His Experience Conducting Surveys
Plaintiff, Wheel Pros, LLC and Defendants, Rhino Tire USA, LLC are engaged in the business of selling wheels and tires for vehicles and each owns trademarks in its respective brand. Wheel Pros owns various trademarks related to its “Black Rhino” brand and Rhino Tire own trademarks for their “Rhino” brand. Plaintiff brought this action against…
-
Court Bars Intellectual Property Expert Witness for Opining on Straightforward Matters of Law
A district judge in New York held that the report of a intellectual property expert witness spoke to straightforward areas of the law where juries did not require assistance. Plaintiff Medical Depot, Inc. and Defendant Med Way US, Inc. are both manufacturers of medical products, including specially designed medical air mattresses. Medical Depot, Inc. began selling various air…
-
Management Consulting Expert Witness’ Opinions on Market Valuation of a Trademark Excluded
This is a case under New York’s Debtor & Creditor law to set aside a February 2019 transfer of the “Halston” and “Halston Heritage” trademarks to Defendants. Comfortex, a garment manufacturer based in Hong Kong alleged that Xcel had used its domination over House of Halston (“HOH”) and its wholly owned subsidiaries (defined below as…
-
Marketing Expert Witness’ Survey Estimating the Likelihood of Consumer Confusion Held to be Reliable
Maker’s Mark entered into a Licensing Agreement with Spalding Group gransting an exclusive license to use its trademarks to create and sell cigars seasoned with its bourbon (the “Licensed Cigars”). After renewing the agreement a few times, in 2013, Maker’s Mark notified Spalding that it was terminating the license effective December 31, 2015. Spalding Group…
-
Consumer Confusion Survey Conducted by Survey Research Expert Witness held to be based on a Reliable Methodology
Plaintiffs, Lincare Holdings Inc.’s and Lincare Licensing Inc.’s (collectively “Lincare”) are national health care companies that provide patients “with top quality treatments and durable medical equipment.” Plaintiffs’ “portfolio includes healthcare goods and services offered in connection with the trademarks LINCARE, mdINR, CONVACARE, AMERICAN HOMEPATIENT, PREFERRED HOMECARE, and the trade name SPECIALIZED MEDICAL SERVICES.” Defendant Doxo, Inc.…
