Claims of Copying App and Marketing it at U.S. Trade Show Support Extraterritorial Application of the Lanham Act

The court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s infringement claim and determined extraterritorial application of the Lanham Act was appropriate. “Plaintiff’s premise is that defendants stole plaintiff’s trademark, used it for defendants’ economic benefit, and as a result plaintiff has been harmed by the loss of sales. Plaintiff alleges purposeful conduct on defendants’ behalf – that defendants undertook lengthy steps to acquire plaintiff’s sensitive product information in an attempt to copy plaintiff’s success – that demonstrate harm to domestic commerce. Harm to a domestic corporation harms American commerce. . . . Plaintiff alleges that such blatant infringement necessarily includes foreseeable harm to American commerce, as intentional market confusion likely includes lost sales to a domestic company. This Court finds this factor favors extraterritorial application. Taking plaintiff’s allegation as true, defendant’s infringement and deception almost certainly involves the purposeful ramifications to the party being infringed upon. . . . [I]n light of the allegedly intentional capture of plaintiff’s concept, in violation of promises made in this country during defendants’ trips to Silicon Valley and aimed at expanding defendants’ business in this country and internationally, the Court finds that the factual allegations are sufficient, at this time, to litigate the extraterritorial claims plaintiff makes under the Lanham Act.”

Updateme Inc. v. Axel Springer SE et al, 3-17-cv-05054 (CAND 2018-03-07, Order) (Susan Illston)

2018-03-09T13:03:03+00:00 March 9th, 2018|Docket Report, Trademark|