David Tuck v. P Gene Shroyer, et al.  ·  2024-07-24  ·  D. New Hampshire  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“[E]xpenses for items such as attorney travel and computer research are not deemed ‘costs’ within the meaning of the federal statute that provides for recovery of costs by a prevailing party.”

Tuck v. Shroyer  ·  2024-07-24  ·  D. New Hampshire  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“[E]xpenses for items such as attorney travel and computer research are not deemed ‘costs’ within the meaning of the federal statute that provides for recovery of costs by a prevailing party.”

Puma v. Wal-Mart Stores East  ·  2022-08-09  ·  New Mexico Court of Appeals  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“It is settled that the Lanham Act does not in general preclude state unfair competition statutes from operating.”

Puma v. W-Mart Stores East  ·  2022-08-09  ·  New Mexico Court of Appeals  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“It is settled that the Lanham Act does not in general preclude state unfair competition statutes from operating.”

Wreal, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc.  ·  2022-06-28  ·  Eleventh Circuit  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“Yet since the alleged harm is reverse confusion, to the ex- tent [the defendant’s housemark] is itself the more recognized label the linkage could actually aggravate the threat to [the plaintiff].”

Wreal, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc.  ·  2022-06-28  ·  Eleventh Circuit  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“Yet since the alleged harm is reverse confusion, to the ex- tent [the defendant’s housemark] is itself the more recognized label the linkage could actually aggravate the threat to [the plaintiff].”

Horizon Roofing, Inc. v. Best And Fast Inc  ·  2022-06-07  ·  D. Minnesota  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“[T]he Lanham Act primarily provides a federal forum for what is in substance a traditional common-law claim. If state substantive regimes are (ordinarily) not preempted by the Lanham Act, neither is New Hampshire’s tinkering with the remedial components.”

SoClean, Inc. v. Sunset Healthcare Solutions, Inc.  ·  2021-08-13  ·  D. Massachusetts  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“The factors commonly considered as to strength—e.g., wide recognition, efforts to promote— are concerned with practical matters and not the legal classification of the mark.”

TrueNorth Companies, LC v. TruNorth Warranty Plans of North America, LLC  ·  2019-11-05  ·  N.D. Iowa  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“But it is accepted that Congress did not prohibit state unfair competition statutes that might have substantive terms somewhat more favorable to plaintiffs than the Lanham Act.”

Oriental Financial Group, Inc. v. Cooperativa De Ahorro Y Crédito Oriental  ·  2016-08-03  ·  First Circuit  ·  pin 436 F.3d at 32

“[T]he more similar the marks are, the less necessary it is that the products themselves be very similar to create confusion”