Nespresso has filed a lawsuit against Jones Brothers Coffee Distribution Company alleging trademark and trade dress infringement. In support of its trademark infringement claim, Nespresso alleges that Jones Brothers’ use of the words “Nespresso Compatible” in connection with its coffee capsules will cause consumers to believe that the Jones Brothers product is endorsed and/or sponsored
Trademark Law
SCOTUS to Decide if Trademark Licensees Lose Their Rights When the Licensor Becomes Insolvent
The Supreme Court has granted review in the matter known as Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology LLC, No. 17-1657, where it will decide whether a licensee loses its right to use a licensed trademark if the licensor files bankruptcy and the bankruptcy trustee chooses to reject the licensor’s license agreement. This decision could…
IP Law Blog Contributor Josh Escovedo Recognized as a Top Trademarks Author in JD Supra 2019 Readers’ Choice Awards
Intellectual Property Law Blog contributor Josh Escovedo was recognized this week as a Top Author for the topic of trademarks in the JD Supra 2019 Reader’s Choice Awards.
Josh Escovedo practices in Weintraub’s Litigation and Intellectual Property sections. He counsels and advises clients in a variety of litigation matters with an emphasis on intellectual…
Consumers Have Standing to Challenge Trademark Registrations
The Trademark Trial and Appeals Board recently issued an interesting decision regarding standing to oppose the registration of trademark applications. United Trademark Holdings, Inc. filed for registration of the mark RAPUNZEL for use in conjunction with dolls and toy figures. However, after the USPTO’s examining attorney published the mark for opposition, a law professor filed…
Googling Google
“I googled it …” has become ubiquitous in every day conversation. Many of us refer to “googling” as the act of searching the internet regardless of whether we use the Google search engine to do so. But has our everyday use of the verb “googling” rendered the Google trademark unprotectable? “Nope,” said the Ninth Circuit…