Arnold Lutzker has been named for the sixth year to the Washington DC Super Lawyers list, selected by his peers. He has also been included under Intellectual Property in the 2014 Super Lawyers Business Edition, which lists top commercial attorneys (both in-house and in private practice) throughout the United States and in London.
Lutzker & Lutzker has filed suit in federal district court in Maryland against Sears Holdings Corporation, Sears, Roebuck and Company and Kmart Corporation on behalf of D&L Company, creators of the award-winning STOMP ROCKET® toy. The suit alleges that the Sears parties distributed and sold a children’s air rocket toy under the Banzai toy line called the STOMP ROCKET in violation of federal and state trademark law and state unfair competition and unfair trade practices law. Among other things, D&L claims that the actions of the Sears parties constitute trademark counterfeiting in violation of the Lanham Act.
Lutzker & Lutzker has also filed, on behalf of D & L Company, amended complaints in its action in federal district court in Maryland against Toys “R” Us. The amended complaints allege that, since the commencement of the litigation, Toys “R” Us committed additional acts of infringement by marketing the ZOMP ROCKETZ air rocket toy, certain air rocket toys marketed under its exclusive “Air Zone” line, and a rocket toy called the AIR HOGS STOMP-RED HELI BLASTER. The Court has allowed Toys “R” Us to bring into the suit its manufacturer, Manley Toys, Ltd., and the case is awaiting service of that complaint. Lutzker & Lutzker is also opposing at the Patent & Trademark Office an application to register ZOMP ROCKETZ as a federal trademark.
The DC Chapter (of which Arnold Lutzker is the president) of the International Network of Boutique Law Firms (INBLF) has published a brochure highlighting the specializations of the firms in the chapter. Practicing before federal agencies, regulatory bodies, Congress and the courts, the DC Chapter serves as a unique resource in the nation’s capital for member firms and clients.
The INBLF DC Chapter hosted the annual conference in October. See the blog for Susan’s update.
The lead article in the Fall 2014 edition of the AIME newsletter by Arnold Lutzker and L&L law clerk Ryan Karr, “Supreme Developments: Petrella and Aereo,” discusses two recent Supreme Court decisions with major import for copyright law. In the first, Petrella v. MGM, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of when suit can be brought in copyright infringement actions, holding that laches (an equitable doctrine that bars claims brought after an unreasonable delay) cannot be invoked to bar any claim within the Copyright Act’s three-year statute of limitations. In the second case, ABC, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc., the Court held that Aereo’s service that allowed subscribers to watch programming originating on local broadcast stations via the Internet on their computers nearly simultaneously with their live broadcast constituted a public performance that infringed the rights of the broadcasters. Aereo’s argument, which the Court rejected, was that its technology, which assigned each subscriber an exclusive antenna, created individual “private performances.”
Lutzker & Lutzker was recently retained and filed suit on behalf of Great Seats, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) in federal district court in Maryland against Great Seats, Ltd. (“Defendant”). The suit appeals the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“TTAB”) issued earlier this year, dismissing Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s application to register the GREAT SEATS mark. Lutzker & Lutzker deliberately chose to file in federal district court (rather than appeal to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals), because the district court venue affords the opportunity to present evidence that was excluded from the TTAB record. In addition, the Complaint alleges that Defendant has, without authorization, used Plaintiff’s GREAT SEATS mark, causing confusion in the marketplace and falsely indicating that its business, goods are services are associated with or endorsed by Plaintiff. Plaintiff traces its use of the mark as early as the 1980s, whereas Defendant claims a first use in 1992. The mark has become widely known as the source of authentic and reliable ticket sales for a wide variety of concerts, performances and sporting events throughout the United States.
Ben Sternberg attended the ABA Forum on Entertainment & Sports Industries. He shares his thoughts on the blog.