James A. Byrne U.S. Courthouse, which houses the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in downtown Philadelphia, PA, on April 3, 2021. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM
A precedential opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit found there was no reversible error in a Delaware district court’s denial of a motion for preliminary injunction brought by Nichino America against Valent U.S.A. in one of the first suits to apply the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020.
Judge Paul Matey, in his written opinion for the court, called the question of whether a federal court may issue an injunction over an allegedly infringing trademark, a bit confusing. In addition to affirming the district court ruling in this case, Matey explained how district courts should apply the “rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm created by the TMA.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
