Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: August 12, 2019
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comA company’s brand names, logos, and designs are often among its most valuable assets. In addition to securing federal trademark protection, it is critical to monitor for potential infringement and, when necessary, take action to enforce your trademark rights.

In order to maintain exclusive rights in a particular mark for your specified goods/services, you must police your registered mark. You can either subscribe to a trademark policing service or perform searches for potential infringement in house. If you plan to monitor your trademark, below are several actions you can take:
Trademark applications are published for opposition before they can be registered on the Principal Register. Trademark owners who believe that they would be damaged by the registration of a mark may file an opposition against that application. Trademark owners may also seek to cancel an existing registration of a trademark if they believe that they would be damaged by the registration.
In basic terms, any ground that negates the defendant’s right to registration may be raised for either opposition or cancellation. The most common ground is that a likelihood of confusion exists between the trademarks. Opposition and cancellation proceedings are conducted by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board and can involve complex legal issues.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) can help enforce your trademark rights. The CBP recognizes three levels of infringement in its enforcement of trademarks: counterfeit marks; copying or simulating marks; and restricted gray market goods (i.e., parallel imports). After you have recorded your federal trademark registration with the CBP, agents can detain and seize imported goods that violate intellectual property rights in the United States.
Under U.S. trademark law, rights are determined according to which party adopted and used the mark in commerce first in connection with a particular set of goods and/or services. That being the case, it is important to conduct an investigation to confirm use dates prior to taking any legal action.
When trademark misuse is found, a cease and desist letter can be an efficient way to resolve it. A cease and desist letter, or “C&D” as you may have heard, is intended to put the receiving party on notice that you believe they are committing an illegal act. It also advises that if they do not stop, you plan to take legal action.
In some cases, filing a lawsuit is the most effective way to resolve a trademark dispute. Under the Lanham Act, the holder of a registered trademark may file a trademark infringement claim against any person who, without the registered trademark holder’s consent, (1) uses any reproduction, counterfeit, or copy of a registered mark; (2) in commerce; (3) in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services; (4) where such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.
To determine whether the defendant’s use of the mark has created a likelihood of confusion, courts consider some combination of the following factors:
While registering your trademark has significant benefits, you can’t simply “set it and forget it.” If you fail to monitor for potential misuse of your mark, you may lose rights. To determine the best course of action to protect your mark, it is always advisable to consult with an experienced intellectual property attorney.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!