United States Ninth Circuit

In a trademark case involving Pycnogenol, an herbal supplement, summary judgment for plaintiff on its trademark dilution claim and a corresponding attorneys' fees award against defendant are affirmed where: 1) plaintiff established actual dilution of its trademark as there was no clear error in a finding that the conflicting marks were identical, and regardless, evidence showed that actual blurring of plaintiff's product and the mark had occurred; 2) defendant did not qualify for the fair use defense; 3) comity, collateral estoppel, and derivative fame arguments failed; and 4) there was no abuse of discretion in the fee award.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/09/2007
• Published 01/09/2007

Judges

• PREGERSON, Circuit Judge., Before HARRY PREGERSON and SIDNEY R. THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and LOUIS F. OBERDORFER, Senior Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Larry Garcia, San Antonio, TX, pro se.


• For Appellees:
  
• Marvin S. Gittes, Timur E. Slonim, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C., New York, NY, for the plaintiff-appellee.