No. 23-194
Trendily Furniture, LLC, et al. v. Jason Scott Collection, Inc.
Tags: consumer-confusion intentional-copying lanham-act pass-off product-design secondary-meaning trade-dress
Latest Conference:
2024-01-05
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether, and to what extent, a competitor's intentional copying alone —without any intent to confuse consumers or pass off its products as plaintiff's —establishes that plaintiff's trade dress has secondary meaning.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether, and to what extent, a competitor's intentional copying alone—without any intent to confuse consumers or pass off its products as the plaintiff's—is probative of whether the plaintiff's trade dress has secondary meaning
Docket Entries
2024-01-08
Petition DENIED.
2023-12-22
Reply of petitioners Trendily Furniture, LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2023-12-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
2023-12-14
Waiver of the 14-day waiting period for the distribution of the petition pursuant to Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner.
2023-12-13
Brief of respondent Jason Scott Collection, Inc. in opposition filed.
2023-11-14
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 13, 2023.
2023-11-13
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 16, 2023 to December 13, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-10-17
Response Requested. (Due November 16, 2023)
2023-10-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/27/2023.
2023-10-03
Waiver of right of respondent Jason Scott Collection, Inc. to respond filed.
2023-08-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 2, 2023)
Attorneys
Jason Scott Collection, Inc.
Shay Dvoretzky — Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Respondent
Thomas Dietrich — Dietrich IP, PLLC, Respondent
Trendily Furniture, LLC, et al.
Daniel L. Geyser — Haynes and Boone, LLP, Petitioner