No. 23-757
Relish Labs LLC, et al. v. Grubhub Inc., et al.
Amici (1)Response RequestedRelisted (2)
Tags: appellate-review clear-error de-novo de-novo-review likelihood-of-confusion multifactor-test standard-of-review trademark-infringement
Key Terms:
Trademark JusticiabilityDoctri
Trademark JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2024-06-06
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1) Whether the determination of a likelihood of confusion for trademark infringement is a factual finding, reviewable for clear error, or a legal conclusion, reviewable de novo, or a combination?
2) Whether a court should disclose its analysis of all the factors in a multifactor likelihood of confusion balancing determination for trademark infringement?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the determination of a likelihood of confusion for trademark infringement is a factual finding, reviewable for clear error, or a legal conclusion, reviewable de novo, or a combination?
Docket Entries
2024-06-10
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/6/2024.
2024-05-17
Reply of petitioners Relish Labs LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2024-05-03
Brief of respondents Grubhub Inc., et al. in opposition filed.
2024-03-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 3, 2024.
2024-03-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 3, 2024 to May 3, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-03-04
Response Requested. (Due April 3, 2024)
2024-02-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2024.
2024-02-12
Brief amici curiae of Max Stul Oppenheimer, et al. filed.
2024-01-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 12, 2024)
Attorneys
Grubhub Inc., et al.
David H. Bernstein — Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, Respondent
Max Stul Oppenheimer
Relish Labs LLC and The Kroger Co.
William Paul Atkins — Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Petitioner