§Why CasetextPricing

GMA Accessories, Inc. v. Electric Wonderland, Inc. et al

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 113 MOTION to Dismiss Counterclaims and Affirmative Defense.. Document

11 Cited authorities

  1. Kaye v. Grossman

    202 F.3d 611 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 566 times
    Holding that, under New York law, a claim for unjust enrichment demands that a plaintiff allege "1

  2. O'Brien v. National Property Analysts Partners

    936 F.2d 674 (2d Cir. 1991)   Cited 390 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding Rule 9(b) dismissal with prejudice

  3. Wexner v. First Manhattan Co.

    902 F.2d 169 (2d Cir. 1990)   Cited 345 times
    Holding that "[d]espite the generally rigid requirement that fraud be pleaded with particularity, allegations may be based on information and belief when facts are peculiarly within the opposing party's knowledge," but noting that "[t]his exception to the general rule must not be mistaken for license to base claims of fraud on speculation and conclusory allegations"

  4. Swain v. Spinney

    117 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1997)   Cited 192 times
    Holding that police officers may not conduct a strip search of an arrestee incident to the arrest

  5. Estee Lauder, Inc. v. Fragrance Counter, Inc.

    189 F.R.D. 269 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)   Cited 64 times
    Finding that delay and expense of litigation could be prejudice

  6. The Clorox Company v. Sterling Winthrop, Inc.

    117 F.3d 50 (2d Cir. 1997)   Cited 55 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trademark is, by its nature, non-exclusionary. And "does not confer a legal monopoly on an good or idea; it confers rights to a name only."

  7. GMA Accessories, Inc. v. Idea Nuova, Inc.

    157 F. Supp. 2d 234 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)   Cited 33 times
    Holding that § 1120 "does not apply to trademark applications that have not been registered"

  8. Juno Online Services, L.P. v. Juno Lighting, Inc.

    979 F. Supp. 684 (N.D. Ill. 1997)   Cited 34 times
    Holding reservation of domain name without a website does not constitute infringement under Lanham Act § 43

  9. GMA Accessories, Inc. v. BOP LLC

    507 F. Supp. 2d 361 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)   Cited 3 times

    No. 07 Civ. 3219 (LTS) (DCF). August 29, 2007 John P. Bostany, Andrew Thomas Sweeney, The Bostany Law Firm, New York, NY, for Plaintiff. Jeffrey Ross Wang, Friedman Kaplan, Seiler Adelman LLP, Roberto Clemente, Carrillo, Garvey Schubert Barer, New, York, NY, Marvin Bartel, Morgan R. Evans, Bartel Evans, L.L.P., Newport Beach, CA, for Defendants. MEMORANDUM ORDER GRANTING DEFAULT JUDGMENT MOTIONS AND INJUNCTION LAURA SWAIN, District Judge In this trademark infringement action, Plaintiff GMA Accessories

  10. Section 1117 - Recovery for violation of rights

    15 U.S.C. § 1117   Cited 4,886 times   144 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts significant discretion to award damages for a violation of § 1125

  11. Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1064   Cited 884 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services