Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Credit: Jason Doiy/The RecorderLife, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed the issue of whether purchasing market competitors’ search engine keyword terms, known as “conquesting,” constitutes trademark infringement.
December 23, 2024 at 01:11 PM
8 minute read
What You Need to Know
- The Lanham Act aims to safeguard consumers from marketplace confusion.
- The crux of 'Lerner & Rowe' is whether the purchase of a competitor’s search engine keyword terms to appear near the top of consumers’ online search, results in fodder for a claim of trademark infringement under the Lanham Act.
- For now, conquesting is alive and well in the Ninth Circuit. Outside of the Ninth Circuit, the questions presented in the concurrence in 'Lerner & Rowe' should not fall on inattentive ears.
By Howard Shire and Di’Vennci K. Lucas
In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Lerner & Rowe PC v. Brown Engstrand & Shely LLC, 119 F.4th 711 (9th Cir. 2024), addressed the issue of whether purchasing market competitors’ search engine keyword terms, known as “conquesting,” constitutes trademark infringement. In particular, the court addressed whether this competitive tactic is likely to confuse or mislead consumers. The crux of the case is whether the purchase of a competitor’s search engine keyword terms to appear near the top of consumers’ online search, results in fodder for a claim of trademark infringement under the Lanham Act?
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
LinkedIn Suit Says Millions of Profiles Scraped by Singapore Firm’s Fake Accounts
5 minute read
Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
4 minute read
NLJ 500 Firm Seeks 20-Day Extension for Restaurant Client's Injunction Compliance
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Trial Court's Sidestep of 'Batson' Deprived Defendant of Challenge to Jury Discrimination
- 2Is Your Law Firm Growing Fast Enough? Scale, Consolidation and Competition
- 3Child Custody: The Dangers of 'Rules of Thumb'
- 4The Spectacle of Rudy Giuliani Returns to the SDNY
- 5Orrick Hires Longtime Weil Partner as New Head of Antitrust Litigation
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
