Trademark Litigation

Trademark litigation requires specialized knowledge and usually conducted in federal courts instead of state courts.  Trademark litigation can be very difficult onthe parties and attorneys involved; and is regarded as the more complex and expensive of a variety of litigation.  We aim to reduce the stress of trademark litigation on our clients by offering them expeditious, cost-effective representation, and doing our best in the early phases of the litigation to terminate it before attorney fees become overwhelming. Some litigants to trademark infringements actions face rapidly escalating attorney costs which make proceeding with their case untenable after the client has already sunk large sums into a case that might have been winnable if resources were better conserved.  We offer all of our litigation clients their choice of either hourly biling, or fixed, flat fee billing for the litigation to try and mitigate this problem.  In a fixed or flat fee billing arrangement, we agree upon a fixed price for all work before each phase of the litigation commences, and bill the client only a predetermined amount as if the litigation passes through each phase.  In many of the cases of which we are aware, our fees total only one-fifth to one-third of the total we are made aware is being billed by opposing counsel for work on the same case.  We would be happy to speak with you about filing or defending patent litigation cases in Utah.

Our Utah attorneys are experienced in trademark litigation matters.

In most, of the filed trademark infringement matters we handle for defendants, we have been able to settle the case without payment from our client, or have the case dismissed, within two months of its filing. We maybe able to prevent trademark infringement cases from even filed from being filed in the first place using detailed response letters and through other pre-litigation communication with opposing counsel.  We have handled a variety of matters before the TTAB (Trade Trial and Appeal Board) including numerous oppositions for both complainants and petitioners.

Trademark Litigation

Trademark litigation is often handled by patent attorneys, who are accustomed to prosecuting patents and trademarks before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).  As commerce on the Internet explodes, the difficulty of picking a brand name which is not already trademarked has exploded along with threatened trademark infringement cases. Trademark litigation has become more prevalent on the dockets of U.S. district courts than it was formerly, and trademark infringement cases brough outside of U.S. courts in other tribunals, including the National Arbitration Forum (NAF), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) now number in the thousands annually.  We regularly handle these trademark infringement matters, and can quickly assess the weaknesses and strengths in most trademark matters.  Common wekaness include: claims of common law trademark rights which are often only geographic in scope (or do not exist), a registered trademark being descriptive or geographically descriptive, and alleged use in commerce stemming from corporate filings for domain name registrations are not actual use in commerce.

Understanding the right to register a trademark and enforce it against other parites requires the skill of an experienced attorney who focuses on trademark matters.  On the right is a list of trademark cases we have recently handled in district courts of the United States.  Though rarer, we have also handled trademark matters in state court, dozens of trademark oppositions and petitions to cancel before the TTAB (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board), and over 150 UDRP domain name disputes involving trademark infringement allegations.  We have prosecuted over 200 pending trademarks before the USPTO.  Let our work benefit you.  We are more cost-effective than larger law operations, and offer RESULTS-ORIENTED REPRESENTATION® to all our clients (a phrase we have trademarked for our firm).

Writing Samples

Trademark Litigation Samples

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (ACPA)
Memorandum in Support of Motion to Stay (Doctrine of Absention)
Transcript of Rinehart's Oral Argument in Support of Summary Judgment

Recent Trademark Litigation Cases

• Accuity v. Acuity Benefits, Inc., No. 2:15-CV-428 (D. Utah) (In litigation).

• Park City Transportation, Inc. v. Park City Limousines, LC. No. 2:15-CV-24) (D. Utah) (In litigation).

• Innovative Staffing, Inc. v. ISHR, LLC. (2:14-CV-927) (D. Utah) (In litigation).

• Strong College Students Moving, Inc v. CHHJ Franchising, 2:12-CV-1156. (D. Arizona) (Concluded after three years of litigation on summary judgment).

• RMV Enterprises v. ksoftware.com, 1:12-CV-335. (E.D. Virginia) (Representing Plaintiff, won domain name transfer to client).

• EZQuest, Inc. v. Baorui, No., 2:12-CV-730 (D. Utah) (Won ex-parte preliminary injunction transfering the domain ezq.com to client).

• Web Entertainment v. y8.org, 1:14-CV-1416 (E.D. Virginia) (Settled).

• Joe Carpenter v. myschool.com, No. 1:15-CV-212 (E.D. Virginia) (Case lost on summary judgment).

• Internet Enterprises, LLC v. Truckmast Logistics Systems, No. 2:09-CV-374 (D. Utah) (Trademark case settled on favorable terms).

• Bullex, Inc. v. JinHakYoo, 2:10-CV-668 (D. Utah) (Won transfer of domain name for New York client from China).