[E-trademarks] SPAM Re: Assigning right to sue for past infringements

Tue Oct 8 19:18:07 UTC 2024

knocked it out of the park!  thank you for posting.

On 10/8/2024 1:01 PM, Kevin Grierson via E-trademarks wrote:
>
> Same for trademarks.  We are in the process of filing a motion to 
> dismiss in a TM infringement case for exactly that reason.
>
> A predecessor's assignment of a trademark carries no right to sue for 
> past infringement, unless the assignment explicitly states that it 
> includes such a right/. George W. Luft Co. v. Zande Cosmetic Co./, 142 
> F.2d 536, 541 (2d Cir. 1944) (explaining that an assignment does not 
> convey existing claims for trademark or patent infringement, but a 
> transfer of all of a corporation's assets would include existing 
> causes of action for both); /see H&J Foods, Inc. v. Reeder/, 477 F.2d 
> 1053, 1056 (9th Cir. 1973) (holding that pre-assignment damages are 
> disfavored, and only allowed when the right to sue is clearly spelled 
> out in the assignment); /Bulte v. Igleheart Bros./, 137 F. 492, 493 
> (7th Cir. 1905) (noting that the plaintiff had received all interest 
> in the trademark at issue, including the rights of action for past 
> infringement); /Lanard Toys, Ltd. v. Novelty Inc./, 511 F. Supp. 2d 
> 1020, 1030 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (holding that the plaintiff had standing 
> to sue for trademark infringement where the assignment included "the 
> right to sue on existing causes of action"); /Fair Undercar Care, Inc. 
> v. Wakefield/, No. 91 C 7021, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10120, 1992 WL 
> 162970, at *2 (N.D. Ill. July 7, 1992) (involving a trademark 
> assignment that included "the right to sue for past infringement").
>
> /Persis Int'l, Inc. v. Burgett, Inc./, No. 09 C 7451, 2011 U.S. Dist. 
> LEXIS 115410, at *7-9 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 26, 2011).
>
> *Kevin Grierson***********
>
> 	
>
> |
>
> 	
>
> Partner
>
>
> 	
>
> Mobile:
>
> 	
>
> 757-726-7799 <tel:757-726-7799>
>
> Fax:
>
> 	
>
> 866-521-5663 <fax:866-521-5663>
>
> Email:
>
> 	
>
> kgrierson at cm.law <mailto:kgrierson at cm.law>
>
> */Please note: Culhane Meadows is now CM Law/**//*
>
>
> *From:*E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> *On 
> Behalf Of *Dale Quisenberry via E-trademarks
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 8, 2024 2:50 PM
> *To:* For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek 
> legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc:* Dale Quisenberry <dale at quisenberrylaw.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [E-trademarks] Assigning right to sue for past 
> infringements
>
> EXTERNAL EMAIL
>
> I agree.  And on the patent side, there is case law going back to a 
> late 1800’s Supreme Court case called Moore v. Marsh (and more 
> recently in Federal Circuit cases such as Arachnid) that say if the 
> right to sue and recover for past infringement is not expressly 
> assigned then it stays with the assignor.
>
> C. Dale Quisenberry
>
> Quisenberry Law PLLC
>
> 13910 Champion Forest Drive, Suite 203
>
> Houston, Texas 77069
>
> (832) 680.5000 (office)
>
> (832) 680.1000 (mobile)
>
> (832) 680.5555 (facsimile)
>
> www.quisenberrylaw.com <http://www.quisenberrylaw.com/>
>
> *This email may contain information that is confidential and subject 
> to the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine and other 
> applicable privileges. This email is intended to be received only by 
> those to whom it is specifically addressed.  Any receipt of this email 
> by others is not intended to and shall not waive any applicable 
> privilege.  If you have received this email in error, please delete it 
> and immediately notify the sender by separate email. Thank you.*
>
> *From: *E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on 
> behalf of Crane, Susan via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 8 October 2024 at 1:45 pm
> *To: *For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek 
> legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc: *Crane, Susan <susan.crane at wyndham.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [E-trademarks] Assigning right to sue for past 
> infringements
>
> That language has always been part of basically every assignment I’ve 
> ever seen. Curious why, if it is already included, counsel pushed back 
> on what is then essentially a belt and suspenders approach.
>
> Susan L. Crane
> Group Vice President, Legal
> Intellectual Property, Brands & Marketing
>
> Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
> 22 Sylvan Way
> Parsippany, NJ 07054
> O (973) 753-6455
> M (973) 879-3420
> Susan.Crane at wyndham.Com
>
>     On Oct 8, 2024, at 2:39 PM, Lara Pearson via E-trademarks
>     <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
>     
>
>     Hi list friends: I hope this finds you smiling. In the past couple
>     years I have included a provision in trademark assignments that
>     allows for the assignee to act on and recover for past
>     infringements. A counterpart's counsel recently pushed
>
>     ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
>
>     *This Message Is From an External Sender *
>
>     Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
>     sender and know the content is safe.
>
>     Report Suspicious
>     <https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!nMaESvDPQaHb74bZmnPp3Al9gjJyLvAxOG9Zt0Ewm-TE85IoEkeD2RT27i7hYuUUB6ALCQ0E6bw0_vUhl0BwBlt8HFTvKXIEhGACg6Ga$>
>
>     ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
>
>     Hi list friends:
>
>     I hope this finds you smiling.
>
>     In the past couple years I have included a provision in trademark
>     assignments that allows for the assignee to act on and recover for
>     past infringements. A counterpart's counsel recently pushed back
>     on this saying that a basic assignment of the Mark & goodwill
>     automatically included those rights. I cannot recall when exactly,
>     nor why, I started including that specific past infringement
>     language in my assignments.
>
>     I would love to hear your thoughts on whether including this extra
>     language is prudent, necessary, or unnecessary, and why.
>
>     Thank you.
>
>     With appreciation for this list serv and each of you wonderful
>     list friends (lurkers too!,
>
>     Lara Pearson, Esq.
>
>     Law Office of Lara Pearson Ltd, PBC & Brand Geek
>
>     775.833.1600
>
>     Calendly.com/BrandGeek (let's meet)
>
>     Creative typoing by iPhone
>
>     -- 
>
>     E-trademarks mailing list
>
>     E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
>
>     https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com__;!!Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!hsJU4hNljbIljSwoajM6ZmE8rzN-zTvG8M1M9qWEEIYT7YP0BORVJUPQOWHxkgfLfnzejyuIZhuNHnRk_ztiMbKmBJlxCBY$
>     <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com__;!!Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!hsJU4hNljbIljSwoajM6ZmE8rzN-zTvG8M1M9qWEEIYT7YP0BORVJUPQOWHxkgfLfnzejyuIZhuNHnRk_ztiMbKmBJlxCBY$>
>
> This email message (including all attachments) is for the sole use of 
> the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. If 
> you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply 
> email and destroy all copies of the original message. Unless otherwise 
> indicated in the body of this email, nothing in this communication is 
> intended to operate as an electronic signature and this transmission 
> cannot be used to form, document, or authenticate a contract. Wyndham 
> Hotels and Resorts and/or its affiliates may monitor all incoming and 
> outgoing email communications in the United States, including the 
> content of emails and attachments, for security, legal compliance, 
> training, quality assurance and other purposes.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20241008/d4a66e5a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20241008/d4a66e5a/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 285 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20241008/d4a66e5a/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 452 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20241008/d4a66e5a/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 394 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20241008/d4a66e5a/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4514 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20241008/d4a66e5a/attachment.p7s>

[E-trademarks] ***SPAM*** Re: Assigning right to sue for past infringements

[E-trademarks] SPAM Re: Assigning right to sue for past infringements