In a trademark infringement action regarding the name of a dice game, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) there was no evidence that consumers linked the mark at issue to plaintiff, and such evidence is generally thought to be the most direct and persuasive way of establishing secondary meaning; and 2) plaintiff presented no meaningful evidence that defendant wished to capitalize on plaintiff’s mark.
Read George & Co., LLC v. Imagination Entm’t Ltd., No. 08-1921
Appellate Information
Argued May 12, 2009
Decided July 27, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Hamilton
Counsel
For Appellant:
Mark S. Sommers, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC
For Appellees:
William Francis Krebs, Bean, Kinney & Korman, PC, Arlington, VA
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
