Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gorsuch
*1494When it comes to remedies for trademark infringement, the Lanham Act authorizes many. A district court may award a winning plaintiff injunctive relief, damages, or the defendant's ill-gotten profits. Without question, a defendant's state of mind may have a bearing on what relief a plaintiff should receive. An innocent trademark violator often stands in very different shoes than an intentional one. But some circuits have gone further. These courts hold a plaintiff can win a profits remedy, in particular, only after showing the defendant willfully infringed its trademark. The question before us…
Also in this document: Concurrence; Concurring in the judgment.
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Smith v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Holmberg v. ArmbrechtSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Dowagiac Manufacturing Co. v. Minnesota Moline Plow Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Liu v. SEC. & Exch. Comm'nSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
- Munchkin, Inc. v. Luv N' Care, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- Max Rack, Inc. v. Core Health & Fitness, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2022
- Harbor Breeze Corp. v. Newport Landing SportfishingCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2022
- Bbk Tobacco & Foods LLP v. Central Coast Agriculture, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.