JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
Bill on Bankruptcy: Lawyers Easily Make Simple Words Complicated
Bill on Bankruptcy: ResCap Report, a Bargain at $83 Million
As Expected, Noel Canning v. NLRB Headed to the Supreme Court
Bill on Bankruptcy: How Purchasers of AMR Stock Made a Killing
Courts are divided on whether their power to order the cancellation of trademark registrations extends to still pending trademark applications under review by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The Ninth...more
In its unanimous April 23, 2020 opinion in Romag Fasteners v. Fossil, Inc., the Supreme Court made clear once and for all that a successful trademark plaintiff is not required to establish that the defendant’s infringement...more
Jones Day's Meredith Wilkes and Anna Raimer discuss 2020's most significant developments in trademark law and preview what's to come in 2021, including possible progress in Washington on the highly anticipated Trademark...more
On May 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc., et al. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., No. 18-1086, addressing the subjects of claim and issue preclusion. The Court held that claim preclusion (or...more
Lucky Brand has emerged victorious in the latest skirmish of its nearly 20-year trademark litigation battle with Marcel Fashions, a competitor in the apparel business. In Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group,...more
Earlier this month, the United States Supreme Court unanimously rebuffed the Second Circuit’s attempt to expand the scope of res judicata to include the so-called concept of “defense preclusion” – a novel doctrine that would...more
The outdated pair of acid washed jeans that your dad wears to mow the lawn seem brand new in comparison to the nearly 20 years of litigation between Lucky Brand and Marcel over the use of various “Lucky” trademarks. Last...more
On May 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in the latest round of a 20-year long trademark dispute between Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. and Marcel Fashion Group, Inc. over the use of “Lucky.” ...more
In Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., the United States Supreme Court recently considered for the first time whether and the extent to which it should recognize “defense preclusion” as a valid...more
In a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of jeans manufacturer, Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. ("Lucky"), in its protracted trademark battle with Marcel Fashions Group, Inc. ("Marcel"), holding that Lucky...more
On May 14, 2020, the United States Supreme Court held in Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc., et al. v. Marcel Fashion Group Inc., that a party is not precluded from raising new defenses, when a subsequent lawsuit between the same...more
Competitors with similar trademarks can find themselves in long-running trademark disputes, making for bitter rivals. Multiple rounds of litigation are not only contentious, but also expose litigants to procedural pitfalls....more
On May 14, 2020, in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the US Supreme Court overturned the “defense preclusion” doctrine proposed by the Second Circuit, upholding the requirement that preclusion of a defense...more
The Supreme Court yesterday issued its second trademark decision of this term. In Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., Case No. 18-1086 (S. Ct. May 14, 2020), the ultimate question before the Court was...more
Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., No. 18-1086: Petitioner Lucky Brand Dungarees and respondent Marcel Fashions Group have been engaged in three separate rounds of trademark-related litigation over a...more
On May 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashion Group, Inc., No. 18-1086, holding that a party is not precluded from raising defenses submitted in earlier...more
On May 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split, finding that any preclusion of litigation defenses must comply with traditional res judicata principles, and ruling that Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. (Lucky...more
Today, a unanimous Supreme Court held in Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group., Inc. that claim preclusion did not prevent Lucky Brand from asserting a defense it failed to fully litigate in a prior lawsuit...more
The Supreme Court unanimously held this week that Lucky Brand was not precluded from mounting a new defense in its litigation with Marcel Fashions Group — despite having chosen not to bring up the same defense in a prior...more
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in a long-running trademark dispute: Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc., et al. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., No. The question presented to the Court was whether Lucky...more
Trademark infringement plaintiffs have long argued that because actual damages in trademark infringement cases are often difficult to measure, receiving a cut of an infringer’s profits is in many cases the only meaningful...more
The Supreme Court of the United States recently granted certiorari in two trademark cases. In Romag Fasteners v. Fossil, the Court will consider whether courts can order trademark infringers to disgorge their profits without...more
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in two trademark cases on June 28, 2019, adding them to its docket for next term. Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., et al. concerns whether, under Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15...more
On Friday, June 28, 2019, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. to decide whether a showing of willfulness is necessary to obtain a defendant’s profits under the Lanham Act....more
Under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), trademark holder who proves infringement may receive as damages an award of profits “subject to the principles of equity.” This phrase has divided the circuit courts going back several decades, with...more