Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Omega, S.A. v. S & N Jewelry Inc. case brief summary

  • Omega, S.A. v. S & N Jewelry Inc. case brief summary 
  •  a store in Chinatown was selling watches bearing counterfeit “Omega” trademarks and trade dress. Seeking preliminary injunction.
    • Had to prove:
      • (1) Ownership of a valid registered trademark AND
      • (2) that the D’s use of the trademarks creates a likelihood of confusion
        • Likelihood of confusion rests on the Polaroid test
          • (1) The strength of the prior owner’s mark
(1)   The level of protection of the mark
(2)   The recognition value of the mark in the marketplace as identifying the course of the goods or services
          • (2) The similarity between the two marks
          • (3) The competitive proximity of the products
          • (4) The likelihood that the prior user will bridge the gap,
          • (5) Actual confusion
          • (6) The D’s good faith
          • (7) The quality of the D’s product
          • (8) The sophistication of the buyers
    • HELD: The continued sales of the counterfeit good will cause a lack of good will and reputation to the P. P has established that their trademark infringement claim will succeed. Preliminary injunction granted.

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide

Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...