American Blind & Wallpaper Factory Drops Google Ads Trademark Suit
American Blind & Wallpaper Factory Inc. agreed to drop its trademark infringement suit against Google on Aug. 31.
September 05, 2007 at 11:39 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
American Blind & Wallpaper Factory Inc. agreed to drop its trademark infringement suit against Google on Aug. 31. The trial was scheduled to start in November.
The suit, filed four years ago, addressed whether Google infringed on American Blind's trademark by selling it as an ad trigger keyword, meaning that competing companies can pay for their ads to appear alongside Google search results for the Michigan-based home d?cor vendor. In June, American Blind & Wallpaper was ordered to pay Google $15,000 in compensation after a judge sanctioned American Blind & Wallpaper for withholding relevant evidence in the case.
Under terms of the dismissal agreement, American Blind & Wallpaper agreed to drop its charges against Google with neither side admitting liability. Google will not be required to change its ad policy or make any payments, including American Blind & Wallpaper's legal fees.
The home d?cor company also agreed to not sue Google over its trademark policy in the future as long as Google does not materially change the policy in any way that would adversely affect American Blind & Wallpaper.
A clause in the agreement also says American Blind & Wallpaper cannot “take any steps to voluntarily assist any other party in asserting any claims against Google.” Accordingly, American Blind & Wallpaper will likely not be helping American Airlines in its similar case, filed in August, which also challenges Google's keyword ad policy.
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 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
Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute read
So You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
FTC Lauds Withdrawal of Proposed Indiana Hospitals Merger After Leaning on State Regulators
4 minute read
How Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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
