Ganoza Comments on Supreme Court Arguments Over ‘Lucky’ Trademark

29 January 2020 Westlaw Journal Intellectual Property News
Partner Laura Ganoza was quoted in a Westlaw Journal Intellectual Property article, “Defense preclusion at issue in ‘Lucky’ trademark tiff before Supreme Court,” about oral arguments over what circumstances allow the doctrine of defense preclusion to apply.

Ganoza said some of the justices were open to Lucky Brand’s policy argument that affirming the 2nd Circuit’s ruling would cause defendants to offer more defenses, thereby creating unnecessary litigation. “This is a legitimate concern that would affect not just dueling apparel companies or trademark cases going forward, but would implicate all litigation, if the 2nd Circuit’s decision is affirmed,” she said. “For that reason, the justices may avoid making this type of ‘defense preclusion’ the law of the land.”

(Subscription required)
 

Insights

Voting in the Age of COVID-19
26 October 2020
Coronavirus Resource Center:Back to Business
401(k) Fee Lawsuits: What Can a Plan Sponsor Do?
26 October 2020
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Department of Defense Formally Implements Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Requirements for Department of Defense Contractors
26 October 2020
Legal News: Government Procurement
FinCEN Takes Action Against Bitcoin Mixer for Violating the Bank Secrecy Act
26 October 2020
Legal News: Government Enforcement Defense & Investigations