The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has reversed its long-standing precedent that provided trademark holders and other Lanham Act plaintiffs seeking injunctive relief with a presumption of irreparable harm. The decision in Ferring Pharmaceuticals v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, — F.3d —, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16426 (3d Cir. August 26, 2014), significantly raises the bar to obtain injunctive relief in trademark cases by requiring that plaintiffs not prove merely their likelihood of success on the merits, but separately establish by evidence that irreparable harm likely would result from the defendant’s conduct in the absence of an injunction.
Prior Presumption Of Irreparable Harm
A plaintiff, generally, is entitled to injunctive relief only in those limited circumstances where it can establish both a likelihood of success on the merits of the case and that it would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were not granted.
This content has been archived.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]
