996 F.2d 1366 (2d Cir. 1993)
Our client, the producer of the “Twin Peaks” television series, brought suit for copyright and trademark infringement against the publisher of an unauthorized trivia book about the series. The district court found that the defendant was a willful infringer,More
No. 90-CV-06147 (S.D. Fla. June 30, 1992)
We obtained a preliminary injunction on a trade dress claim concerning the design of suntan lotion packages.More
802 F. Supp. 965 (S.D.N.Y. 1992)
Coors claimed that television and radio commercials run by our client Anheuser-Busch stating that Coors’ beer was shipped in railroad tankers and diluted with local water, disparaged its beer. The court denied Coors’s motion for a preliminary injunction and allowed the commercials to continue running because of Coors’More
963 F.2d 350 (Fed. Cir. 1992)
In a frequently cited case that established the proposition that famous marks are entitled to strong protection, we successfully opposed competitor’s application to register mark FUNDOUGH due to potential confusion with Parker’s mark PLAY-DOH.More
746 F. Supp. 1159 (D. Mass. 1990)
In one of the only decisions of its kind, the district court ruled in favor of our clients in finding that there was no likelihood of confusion when the identical mark “Pump” was used as the name of an album by our client,More
719 F. Supp. 161 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)
We obtained a preliminary injunction against defendant’s sale of telephones that copied the trade dress of our client’s “Fun Phones,” unique lucite-cased telephones with brightly colored components.More
892 F.2d 74 (4th Cir. 1989)
The Fourth Circuit protected as trademark a configuration for Lifesavers candy that had once been the subject of a design patent.More
10 U.S.P.Q. 2d 2006 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)
We obtained preliminary injunctive relief to prevent distribution of condoms packaged as American Express cards bearing the phrase NEVER LEAVE HOME WITHOUT IT.More
874 F.2d 109 (2d Cir. 1989)
We obtained summary judgment for defendant in a decision that clarifies the circumstances under which confidentially disclosed information loses its protectable character.More
868 F.2d 1313 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 493 US 883 (1989)
We established the point that defendant’s joint authorship with plaintiff of an underlying medical work did not entitle him to claim copyright co-ownership or fair use of the material newly added by plaintiff to derivative work based on the co-authored underlying work where the defendant had not participated in preparing the new material to update the original work.More