Trademark infringement halted

A competitor launched a near-identical mark in the same retail channel. We secured a preliminary injunction within six weeks, then settled for damages and a permanent bar.

Practice

Intellectual Property

Year

2024

Duration

5 months

Lead attorney

Elena Morris

The challenge

Our client, a British homeware brand sold through department stores and its own site, found a competitor selling a similar product line under a mark that differed by a single letter, in near-identical packaging.

Customers were already confusing the two. Reviews meant for the competitor were appearing on our client’s product pages, and a key retail buyer had asked whether the brands were related.

Trademark infringement halted — case result

Our approach

Speed mattered more than anything else, so we built the injunction application first and the damages claim second.

01. Gather the confusion evidence

We collected misdirected reviews, customer emails and the buyer’s enquiry within ten days, with signed witness statements.

02. Apply for interim relief

We applied for an interim injunction on the strength of our client’s registered marks and the evidence of actual confusion.

03. Negotiate from the order

With the injunction in place and the competitor’s stock frozen, we opened settlement talks on damages and a permanent undertaking.

“Six weeks from the first call to a court order. We did not think that was possible.”

Founder, homeware brand

The outcome

The court granted the injunction six weeks after we were instructed. The competitor withdrew its product, paid $1.8M in damages and costs, and agreed to a permanent bar on using the mark or any similar sign.

$1.8M

settlement and permanent injunction

5 months

matter duration

2024

year resolved

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Some details have been changed to protect client confidentiality.

Case facts

$1.8M

settlement and permanent injunction

Practice

Intellectual Property