Cluster 281924
green
· 68 citation events
across 22 courts.
Showing the 41 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby's Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968) ("the fact that the persons thus acting are acting for a corporation also, of course, may make the corporation liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
"the fact that the persons thus acting are acting for a corporation also, of course, may make the corporation liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior. It does not relieve the individuals of their responsibility."
Even though an individual’s actions “on behalf of the corporation may lead to liability for that corporation under the doctrine of respondeat superior, ‘it does not relieve the individuals of their responsibility.’” Id. (quoting Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Svc., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968)).
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968) (“There can be no doubt but that a trademark, like a patent, can be infringed by an individual . . .
Furthermore, because corporations can only act through individuals, “if there was an infringement by the corporation, this infringement was caused by some one or more persons either officers or employees of the corporation who caused the acts to be done.” Id. (citing Mead Johnson & co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1958)). “[A] corporate officer who directs, controls, ratifies, participates in, or is the moving force behind the infringing activity,…
green
Rolex Watch USA Inc v. Beckertime LLC (2021)
Individual Liability Standard “There can be no doubt that a trademark, like a patent, can be infringed by an individual.” Eng’g Dynamics, Inc. v. Structural Software, Inc., 26 F.3d 1335 , 1349–50 (5th Cir. 1994) (citing Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968)).
green
Master Saddles Inc v. Taylor (2021)
Id. (citing, inter alia, and quoting Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s -18- Formula Serv., Inc, 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968)).
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968) (emphasis added); see also Engineering Dynamics, Inc. v. Structural Software, 26 F.3d 1335, 1349-50 (5th Cir. 1994).
emphasis added
“Obviously ... if there was an infringement by the corporation, this infringement was caused by some one or more persons either officers or employees of the corporation who caused the acts to be done.” Id. (quoting Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968)).
Indeed, corporate infringement always results from “one or more persons either officers or employees of the corporation who caused the acts to be done.” Id. (alteration in original) (quoting Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968)) (internal quotation mark omitted).
green
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Yakubets (2014)
“The fact that an officer is acting for a corporation also may make the corporation vicariously or secondarily liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior; it does not however relieve the individual of his responsibility.” Donsco, Inc. v. Casper Corp., 587 F.2d 602, 606 (3d Cir.1978) (citing Zubik v. Zubik, 384 F.2d 267, 275 (3d Cir.1967)); e.g., Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968) (“The fact that the persons thus acting are …
green
Bentley Motors Ltd. v. McEntegart (2013)
As such, all three (3) defendants are responsible for any liability connected therewith.”); Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968) (“[A trademark] is infringed when an individual performs the act or does the things that the ... trademark law protects against.
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968).
green
NATIONAL BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE v. Busby (2011)
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968).
green
Texas v. American Blastfax, Inc. (2001)
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
green
United States v. Washington Mint, LLC. (2000)
See, e.g., Donsco, Inc. v. Casper Corp., 587 F.2d 602, 606 (3rd Cir.1978); Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
green
Westchester Media Co. v. PRL USA Holdings, Inc. (1999)
Non-infringing use of a mark is not relevant to a defense of laches.” Id. at 205 (citing Conan Properties, 752 F.2d at 151-52 , and to Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 22 (5th Cir.1968)).
green
Engineering Dynamics, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Structural Software, Inc., and S. Rao Guntu… (1994)
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968) (“the fact that the persons thus acting are acting for a corporation also, of course, may make the corporation liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
green
Metromedia Steakhouses Co. v. Resco Management, Inc. (1994)
Donsco, Inc. v. Casper Corp., 587 F.2d 602, 606 (3d Cir.1978) (corporate officer is personally liable for torts he commits); Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968) (corporate officer liable for trademark infringement); Brandywine Mushroom Co. v. Hockessin Mushroom Prod., Inc., 682 F.Supp. 1307, 1311 (D.Del.1988) (officer of corporation personally liable for tort of unfair competition); Polo Fashions, Inc. v. Gordon Group, 627 F.Supp.…
Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
A corporate officer can be held individually liable for trademark infringement when he “performs the act or does the things that the ... trademark law protects against.” Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
The court relied on the Fifth Circuit decision in Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby's Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 , 159 USPQ 328, 331 (5th Cir.1968), holding the individual defendants liable because they controlled and directed the acts of the corporation. 38 The district court's decision denying Wilco's motion to dismiss was part of its original decision on liability.
green
Kori Corp. v. Wilco Marsh Buggies & Draglines, Inc. (1985)
The court relied on the Fifth Circuit decision in Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 , 159 USPQ 328, 331 (5th Cir.1968), holding the individual defendants liable because they controlled and directed the acts of the corporation.
green
H-D U.S.A., LLC v. SunFrog, LLC (2018)
See Chanel, Inc. v. Italian Activewear of Fla., Inc. , 931 F.2d 1472 , 1477-78 (11th Cir. 1991) ("Because of its very nature a corporation can act only through individuals. 'Obviously...if there was an infringement by the corporation, this infringement was caused by some one or more persons either officers or employees of the corporation who caused the acts to be done.' ") (quoting Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby's Formula Serv., Inc. , 402 F.2d 19 , 23 (5th Cir. 1968) ); Meyer v…
green
Deniece Design, LLC v. Braun (2013)
See Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968) 11 ; Committee for Idaho’s High Desert, Inc. v. Yost, 92 F.3d 814 , 823 (9th Cir.1996); Choice Hotels Intern., Inc. v. Patel, 940 F.Supp.2d 532, 541-42 , 2013 WL 1655003, *6 (S.D.Tex.
green
Choice Hotels International, Inc. v. Patel (2013)
See Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
green
Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. v. Capece (1998)
See Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 22 (5th Cir.1968) (finding long years of noninfringing use of mark would not establish laches as to a later infringing use).
green
Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. v. Capece (1998)
See Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby's Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 22 (5th Cir.1968) (finding long years of noninfringing use of mark would not establish laches as to a later infringing use). 77 EPE knew of the Defendants' use of "The Velvet Elvis" mark when it was published in the PTO's Official Gazette in December 1992.
green
Interstate Battery System of America, Inc. v. Wright (1993)
See Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
green
Chanel, Inc. v. Italian Activewear Of Florida, Inc. (1991)
See Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby's Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19 (5th Cir.1968); 15 U.S.C.A.
green
Chanel, Inc. v. Italian Activewear of Florida, Inc. (1991)
See Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19 (5th Cir.1968); 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1114 & 1127.
green
Southern Bell Telephone And Telegraph Company v. Associated Telephone Directory Publishers (1985)
See Mead Johnson and Co. v. Baby's Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
See Mead Johnson and Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968).
green
Selchow & Righter Co. v. Goldex Corp. (1985)
See, Mead Johnson and Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19 (5th Cir.1968).
green
Domenico Di Campo Falchini (2025)
June 10, 2009); see also Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19 (5th Cir. 1968) (reversing lower court’s decision to dismiss the proceedings against the individual defendants based on the improper assumption that it would require piercing the corporate veil).
reversing lower court’s decision to dismiss the proceedings against the individual defendants based on the improper assumption that it would require piercing the corporate veil
green
Recif Resources, LLC v. Juniper Capital Advisors, LP (2020)
Tex. Nov. 4, 2015) (“Cases have held that all participants in copyright infringement are jointly and severally liable as tortfeasors.”); see also Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968).
green
Express Lien Inc v. Handle, Inc. (2020)
Feb. 26, 1992); see also Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir. 1968) (holding that individuals actively involved in infringement are also liable).
holding that individuals actively involved in infringement are also liable
See, e.g., Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Svc., Inc., 402 F.2d 19 (5th Cir.1968) (holding that, where the defendant used a non-infringing mark for years and then changed the mark to an infringing use, the years of non-infringing use are not counted towards laches); Indep.
green
Council of Better Bus. Bureaus v. Bailey & Assoc. (2002)
See, e.g., Mead Johnson *1219 & Co. v. Baby's Formula Serv., Inc., 402 F.2d 19, 23 (5th Cir.1968) (corporations are liable for the infringements of their agents); cf. American Tel. & Tel.
green
Donsco, Inc. v. Casper Corp. (1978)
See also Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby’s Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19 (5th Cir. 1968) (corporate officer may be individually liable for trademark infringement); Steak & Brew, Inc. v. Makins, 177 U.S.P.Q. 412 (D.Conn.1973) (also holding that officer may be individually liable for trademark infringement).
corporate officer may be individually liable for trademark infringement
green
Donsco, Inc. v. Casper Corporation (1978)
See also Mead Johnson & Co. v. Baby's Formula Service, Inc., 402 F.2d 19 (5th Cir. 1968) (corporate officer may be individually liable for trademark infringement); Steak & Brew, Inc. v. Makins, 177 U.S.P.Q. 412 (D.Conn.1973) (also holding that officer may be individually liable for trademark infringement).
corporate officer may be individually liable for trademark infringement