Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

Mattel's Trademark, Verizon's Patent Infringement Suit, and Anti-Dumping Matters

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on April 16, 2010 3:39 PM

Today, the Federal Circuit decided two intellectual property matters involving trademark related to toys and games and Verizon's patent infringement suit, and an anti-dumping matter involving importation of warm-water shrimp.

Crash Dummy Movie, LLC v. Mattel, Inc., No. 09-1239, concerned an appeal of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's decision sustaining Mattel Inc's challenge to the Crash Dummy Movie, LLC's (CDM) application to register the CRASH DUMMIES mark for a line of games and playthings.  Because substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that Mattel intended to resume use of the mark during the period of non-use, the Board correctly concluded that CDM may not register the mark, CRASH DUMMIES.

Verizon Serv. Corp. v. Cox Fibernet Virginia, Inc., No. 09-1086 involved Verizon's patent infringement suit against Cox Fibernet Virginia, Inc. involving several of its patents related to packet-switched technology which increases the efficiency of the underlying network over traditional circuit switching.  The court affirmed the judgment of the district court's finding of non-infrigement, including the denial of Verizon's motion for a new trial on all issues based on defendant's allegedly improper arguments regarding claim scope and the denial of both parties' motions for JMOL of validity or invalidity.

Gallant Ocean (Thailand) Co., Ltd. v. US, No. 09-1282, concerned a challenge to the Court of International Trade's affirmance of the United States Department of Commerce's decision to apply an adverse facts available (AFA) rate of 57.64% against a Thai exporter of frozen warmwater shrimp.  However, because substantial evidence does not support the unreasonable high rate, which did not and does not represent commercial reality, the decision is vacated and remanded. 

Related Resources:

Find a Lawyer

More Options