Court of Appeals Reverses $21 Million Trial Outcome Based on Rhonda Harper’s Testimony Trade Area Non-Compete Was Unreasonable, Says Harper Ortega sued Abel for breach of a covenant not to compete, tortious interference with the covenant, and…
Likelihood of Confusion Origin, Sponsorship, Approval, Association, Affiliation, and Connection The Lanham Act clearly spells out when a trademark has been infringed. Specifically, it says: Any person who, or in connection with any goods or…
Avoiding Daubert Challenges With more than 160 trademark and trade dress surveys completed, Rhonda Harper, Harper Litigation Consulting and Research, ensures she meets the standards set forth in Fed. R. Evid. 702 and Fed….
Pilot Surveys Inform Your Case Strategy Pre-test your methodology, stimuli, and more Ms. Harper will design, program, and field pilot surveys to inform your case strategy. The objective of pilot surveys is to provide input on…
Consumer Confusion Can Be Confusing From initial confusion to post-purchase confusion – what’s the right course? Consumer Confusion can be, well, confusing. There are many different types of confusion that can support an allegation of…
Expose Critical and Fatal Survey Flaws Survey rebuttals can save your case Your intellectual property infringement case is hanging on the validity of an expert survey. The expert is experienced and the report looks solid….
Is a Survey Necessary? Yes, according to the John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law “Courts have continually utilized surveys to show evidence of secondary meaning, generieness, dilution, and functionality in trademark litigation.” – The…
Trademark Facts You Need to Know Directly from the USPTO The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is a fee-funded agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The role of the USPTO is to…
Engage the Lanham Act Survey Experts Download the Lanham Act Download the Lanham Act Click Here Lanham Act Sec. 10. Assignment [15 U.S.C. ß 1060] (a) A registered mark or a mark for which an…
Each of the 13 federal courts of appeal have their own test for evaluating whether a likelihood of confusion exists between two trademarks. Although the tests are not identical, most of them are substantially similar and use many of the same factors. And the factors are non-exclusive.