In College of Traditional Chinese Medical Practitioners and Acupuncturists of British Columbia v. Council of Natural Medicine College of Canada (2009 FC 1110), the Federal Court ("FC") granted the College of Traditional Chinese Medical Practitioners and Acupuncturists of British Columbia's ("Chinese Traditional College") motion for summary judgment. Registered and application marks of the Council of Natural Medicine College of Canada ("Natural Medicine College") were expunged for being descriptive under section 12(1)(b) of the Trade-Marks Act (the "Act"), not distinctive under section 18(b), and invalid for registration and in fine under section 18(1). A permanent injunction was issued against Natural Medicine College on two grounds: its marks had previously been commercially usaged under section 10 and mislead the public under section 7(d) of the Act. (more...)
Posts Tagged ‘Summary Judgment’
FC Declines to Apply Official Mark Prohibitions to Traditional Chinese Medicine Designations, Grants Summary Judgement Finding Designation Acronyms Descriptive, Recognized
Posted in Canada: Trademarks 
Tags: Injunction, merely descriptive, official marks, profession, Summary Judgment 
No Comments »TTAB rules minimual evidence of actual confusion suffuicent for summary judgemnt on liklihood of confusion where mark identical to prior famous mark used on identical goods
In Texas Department of Transportation v. Richard Tucker, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB") unanimously granted the Texas Department of Transportation's ("TxDOT") motion for summary judgment, holding no genuine issue of material fact existed and Richard Tucker's ("Tucker") mark was likely to cause confusion.
TxDOT and Tucker both claimed use of and registered the same mark, "DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS" for goods, specifically clothing. TxDOT, claiming priority of use and a likelihood of confusion under 15 U.S.C. § 1052, filed a petition to cancel Tucker's registration and a notice of opposition against Tucker's pending application under 15 U.S.C. § 1064 and 15 U.S.C. § 1063 respectively. The two cases were consolidated. (more...)
TTAB denies summary judgment in opposition alleging fraudulent use claim where no industry-specific definition of service ‘production of energy’ existed
In Enbridge, Inc. v. Excelerate Energy, LP (Opp. No. 91170364) , the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB") unanimously denied the motion for summary judgment brought by Opposer Enbridge, Inc. ("Enbridge") based on fraud. The TTAB found that there was not "clear and convincing" evidence that Applicant Excelerate Energy, LP ("Excelerate") intended to deceive the USPTO. (more...)
FC Grants Summary Judgment in Passing-Off Case
In 2045978 Ontario Inc. (Chaps The Original) v. Chaps Aldershot (2009 FC 872), the Federal Court allowed a motion for summary judgment in a dispute between two restaurant owners. The Court held the evidence clearly indicated infringement and passing-off by defendant Chaps Aldershot, as defined by ss. 19, 20 and s.7(b) of the Trade-Marks Act, respectively. (more...)
FC Refuses s.8 PMNOCR Summary Judgment where Construction of Regulatory Scheme Unsettled
In Apotex Inc. v. Pfizer Canada Inc. (2009 FC 631), the Federal Court (FC) dismissed Pfizer Canada Inc.’s (Pfizer) motion for summary judgment. Due to the complicated statutory interpretations of s.8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (PMNOCR), summary judgment had never been granted in the past. The issue was whether Apotex’s Statement of Claim failed to disclose a genuine issue for trial so that summary judgment should be granted. In particular, whether Pfizer’s application for an order of prohibition caused any damages allegedly suffered by Apotex, such that Pfizer is liable under s.8 of the PMNOCR. The question of whether the outcome of any proceeding could be considered when determining whether Pfizer’s had wrongly delayed Apotex’s generic drug approval weighed against summary judgment. (more...)
|