United States Fifth Circuit

In a Lanham Act and breach of contract action involving a design used on rice sold in Saudi Arabia, judgment for plaintiff and an award of damages are affirmed as to the liability findings, vacated as to a profits and attorney's fees award, and remanded where: 1) contrary to a claim that the district court improperly exercised extraterritorial jurisdiction because the allegedly infringing conduct took place in Saudi Arabia, the exercise of jurisdiction was proper; 2) the court rejects claims that plaintiff did not have a protectable right in the Design mark asserted and that a likelihood of confusion finding was clearly erroneous; 3) there was no abuse of discretion in a finding that plaintiff's claim was not barred by laches; 4) an injunction granted was not overbroad; 5) the district court properly applied the election of remedies theory; 6) for purposes of a profits award, the district court abused its discretion in an amended order finding $227.10 in profits for defendant; and 7) consequently, under the election of remedies theory, an increased profits award was proper instead of a lesser attorney's fees award.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/22/2008
• Published 02/25/2008

Judges

• W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge:, Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fifth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• John M. Mings (argued), Michael S. McCoy, Fulbright & Jaworski, Houston, TX, for American Rice, Inc., Thomas Louis Casagrande (argued), Rodney K. Caldwell, Richard Loren Stanley, Howrey LLP, Houston, TX, for Producers Rice Mill.