The United States Supreme Court, which rarely gets involved in trademark cases, has ruled that when a Defendant in a Trademark infringement case countersues to cancel the Plaintiff’s registration, the Plaintiff can divest a court of jurisdiction over the cancellation by granting the Defendant a broad covenant not to sue.
In Already LLC, d/b/a/ YUMS, v. Nike, Inc., 568 U.S. ____(2013), Nike sued Already over an alleged violation of a trade dress registration for a shoe.
Already counterclaimed to cancel the registration. In response, Nike granted Already a very broad promise not to sue, dismissed its complaint, and then moved to dismiss the counterclaim as moot (i.e., unnecessary). Under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, federal courts do not have jurisdiction to hear a case where there is no real case or controversy. Hence, the trial court dismissed the counterclaim because the court could not envision any scenario under which the defendant could ever be sued for infringement given the broad covenant not to sue. In other words, there was no jurisdiction to ask the lower court to cancel the registration because there was no longer a controversy. In affirming the decision, the Supreme Court drew an analogy to, and applied, cases in which the defendant voluntarily ceases the conduct alleged in the complaint, with no reasonable chance of it recurring, which deprives the courts of further jurisdiction.
Please see full article below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.
Topics: Already LLC, Article III, Counterclaims, Covenant Not to Sue, Federal Jurisdiction, Infringement, Mootness, Nike, Registration, SCOTUS, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Trademark Bullying, Trademarks
Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, General Business Updates, Constitutional Law Updates, Intellectual Property Updates
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
© Venable LLP | Attorney Advertising