Luxottica Group S.p.A. Sues Online Sellers Over Trademark Infringement
The topic at hand: Luxottica Group S.p.A. sues online sellers over trademark infringement. For that reason, your e-commerce business is getting held back by a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). Naturally, without having access to your online seller funds, you are unable to fully operate, which is a huge inconvenience. To this end, you must address the allegations posited by Luxottica against you, meaning, you need to respond to the legal notice.
Case No. 22-cv-04578, Luxottica Group S.p.A: How To Respond to Temporary Restraining Orders
In the first place, know that Luxottica is claiming that your e-commerce store offered counterfeit Ray-Ban, Oakley, Persol, and Costa eyewear to unknowing customers in the United States. Secondly, the lawsuit further specifies that it is focused on Amazon, Wish.com, eBay, DHgate, AliExpress, Walmart, and Alibaba sellers. Moreover, due to these claims, you will not have access to your accounts or money until you provide a response to the court. ***Failure to respond may result in a default judgment!***
E-Commerce Sellers Sued by Luxottica Group S.p.A: Absolutely Respond to the Notice: Trademark Infringement and Counterfeiting
Undoubtedly, you would like to have the TRO removed from your account. We are here to help you! Fear not, as our team of unmatched intellectual property attorneys will work closely with you to unburden you from the disruption of the Temporary Restraining Order. Contact us today for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, check out our blog for new weekly updates for e-commerce sellers.
For more content on the same subject, check out Dyson Suing Online Sellers for Trademark Infringement and Counterfeiting.
Dyson Suing Online Sellers for Trademark Infringement and Counterfeiting
The long and short of it is: Dyson is suing online sellers for trademark infringement and counterfeiting. Needless to say, as an e-commerce seller offering Dyson products, you may be enduring the negative effects of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). What a nuisance! For that reason, you are barred from accessing money earned from the sale of Dyson household appliances.
Please Respond to the Notice! Case No. 22-cv-04546, Dyson Suing for Counterfeiting and Trademark Infringement
To explain, Dyson claims e-commerce sellers like you sold counterfeit goods to consumers in the United States. Further, the lawsuit specifies that the platforms used for these transactions are Amazon, eBay, Wish.com, Alibaba, AliExpress, Etsy, and DHgate. Without question, we cannot emphasize how important it is that you provide a response to the court. To put it another way, a lack of a response will not eliminate the TRO and it may very well equate to a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
E-Commerce Sellers Sued by Dyson: The Notice is NOT SPAM!
To conclude, with regard to Case No. 22-cv-04546, it is imperative that you seek the proper legal counsel. Our team of astute intellectual property attorneys will be available to you throughout the entire process. We will dedicate our years of niche experience in this area to providing you with the most effective response strategy. Ultimately, we want what you want: To lift the Temporary Restraining Order affecting your online seller accounts.
Contact us today for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, check out our blog for new weekly updates for e-commerce sellers.
Have a moment? Perhaps you’d like to peruse our article on how sellers are also being sued for selling Levi’s!
Levi Strauss & Co. Suing for Counterfeiting and Trademark Infringement
Levi’s: counterfeiting and trademark infringement. At the present time, your e-commerce accounts may be frozen due to a lawsuit filed by Levi’s. In effect, the company claims the named defendants are selling unauthorized Levi’s jeans and other apparel. To be sure, the suit was filed by Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd., Case No. 22-cv-03226.
Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. Case No. 22-cv-03226: We Urge You to Respond!
Based on the claims in the lawsuit, you may have a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against your e-commerce accounts. In this case, Levi’s states the defendants “deceive unknowing consumers by using the LEVI’S Trademarks without authorization…” and “engage in fraudulent conduct.” Meanwhile, with the TRO in effect, you are unable to access the funds your business has generated. In short, it is incumbent upon you to take the necessary action.
Levi’s Claiming Trademark Infringement and Counterfeiting, Case No. 22-cv-03226
Regardless of whether or not Levi’s claims are true, you should submit an Answer to the court to alleviate yourself of the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), as it relates to Levi’s claiming trademark infringement and counterfeiting. Not to mention, the lack of an Answer could result in a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff. Undoubtedly, you will want to respond, for the notice has real-world implications concerning your livelihood and business.
The Notice is Not Spam! Respond to Get the TRO Lifted: Levi Strauss & Co., Counterfeiting and Trademark Infringement
We understand that you may be feeling anxious or overwhelmed, but we are on standby to fight on your behalf! Feel free to email our firm or call (718)-657-7400 for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, be sure to review our blog weekly for new updates and information for e-commerce sellers.
Perhaps you would like to read about a similar case involving intellectual property and Lululemon!
E-Commerce Sellers Sued by Lululemon, Claims Counterfeiting and Trademark Infringement
Lululemon is suing online sellers. As a result of the recent lawsuit, your online accounts may not be accessible to you. The reason for this is what’s known as a Temporary Restraining Order or TRO. Indeed, if the TRO has taken effect, you have already been prevented from touching your hard-earned dollars. According to Lululemon, you may have knowingly offered counterfeit and trademark infringing products to customers throughout the United States.
Absolutely Respond to the Notice: Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. Case No. 22-cv-03706, Lululemon Sues for Counterfeiting and Trademark Infringement
Lululemon, the US-Canadian athletic and lifestyle brand, is suing e-commerce sellers for the alleged sale of counterfeit and trademark infringing goods. To further explain, the lawsuit is targeting sellers who depend on digital marketplaces such as eBay, Etsy, Amazon, Wish.com, DHgate, AliExpress, and Alibaba, among others. Given that, you may want to simply ignore the notice, move on with your life and business dealings, and forget about it. However, if you fail to respond to the court, the TRO will maintain its hold on your accounts, causing further disruption. In addition, failure to respond could lead to a default judgment against you.
The Lawsuit is Not Spam: Respond to the Claim That You Are Selling Counterfeit and Trademark Infringing Products: E-Commerce Sellers Sued by Lululemon
Lastly, please, do not worry! Do not be intimidated by the Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. lawsuit Case No. 22-cv-03706. Our team of seasoned and professional intellectual property attorneys will be available to you throughout the entire process. We will meticulously examine the details of your particular case and then develop a response to the notice so as to remove the Temporary Restraining Order from your e-commerce accounts. Contact us today for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, check out our blog for new weekly updates for e-commerce sellers.
Read our article regarding Amazon false counterfeit claims, Why Amazon Needs to Do Better!
Amazon False Counterfeit Claims Putting Honest Sellers Out of Business
Let’s discuss Amazon false counterfeit claims. Amazon is leaving the door open for e-commerce sellers to falsely claim trademark infringement against their competitors. Which is to say, thriving online marketplace operators are being put out of business. This is a direct result of Amazon’s flawed internal method for reporting trademark infringement. As an online seller, you may become the victim of this unfair system and lose your hard-earned livelihood. Amazon has developed some of the world’s most advanced technology, therefore you would think they are capable of developing a system which could better identify and filter these false complaints at the filing stage.
Amazon Needs to Start Protecting Sellers from False Trademark Infringement Claims
The scenario we are referring to typically sticks to a similar pattern of malicious behavior. Competitors specifically target an Amazon seller just like you. One whose account has thousands upon thousands of successful sales and positive reviews. These ill-intentioned folks have developed a strategy to take you and your business down. Sadly, Amazon is providing the avenue for them to do so in just a few clicks.
Online Sellers Are Going Out of Business Due to Amazon’s Report Infringement Model
As of right now, all your competitor has to do is visit Amazon’s “Report Infringement” page and fill out their Report Infringement Form. And just like that, they have submitted a claim that you are committing an intellectual property violation. In some cases, the complainant is abusing a trademark that has not been applicable for years, aka a “Dead Trademark.” Amazon is basically allowing this to happen because they do not closely scrutinize these claims.
Case in Point:
Most recently, our attorneys came across a hard-working seller who received a counterfeit complaint, which resulted in the suspension of their Amazon account. Upon review, the trademark asserted had been abandoned over 20 years ago and was for a completely difference category of goods and services. In addition, the filing party had absolutely no affiliation with the owner of the abandoned mark used to take down this honest seller.
We believe it should take less than a minute to verify the active status of a trademark as well as the class of goods and services it protects. Amazon needs to streamline this process, because above all, it would protect the honest sellers that comprise the very heart and soul of the company’s shopping experience.
Amazon Needs to Improve the Report Infringement Process For Determining Validity of Counterfeit Claims
Unfortunately, such a vetting process does not exist. Worse yet, Amazon will often side with the competitor, which leaves honest, successful sellers like you out in the cold. Taking all of that info consideration, It stands to reason that Amazon needs to improve its process for determining the validity of counterfeit claims. Amazon is not protecting sellers like you, the very entities that built the value of the company from the ground up into the massive global marketplace it is today. Furthermore, due to the lack of infrastructure to determine trademark validity, you are vulnerable and may already be the victim of such false claims by vicious competitors.
The legal team at Stockman & Poropat, PLLC has a deep knowledge of and vast experience in handling these matters. We will contact the competitor who filed the claim on Amazon, demand they retract the claims filed, and aid you in appealing to Amazon to demonstrate that the complaint is false. Beyond these efforts, we will also bring litigation against the sellers who filed falsely and arbitration against Amazon if required, in order to restore your account as quickly as possible.
Feel free to email us or call (718)-657-7400 for more information on this subject. If you found this content helpful, be sure to review our blog weekly for new updates and information for e-commerce sellers.
Be sure to check out our articles regarding Amazon Temporary Restraining Orders (TRO) related to Crayola, General Motors, and Telfar!