Share
Jackpocket employed a lawsuit to guard against what it saw as the dilution of its branding. That action hasn’t produced the desired result, however, and the lottery courier service now has some decisions to make.
A federal court ruled against Jackpocket, throwing out its complaint. The ruling could clear the way for the defendant in the action to start mounting a challenge to Jackpocket in the United States.
Background of the Jackpocket trademark lawsuit
Jackpocket filed its complaint in July. The defendant in the case is Jackpot, one of the newest lottery courier services in the US. Jackpocket argued that Jackpot’s branding was extremely similar to its own and Jackpot was trying to boost its market share by taking advantage of that association.
Jackpocket asked the court to force Jackpot to essentially re-brand itself in a way that users might not confuse the two companies. Furthermore, Jackpocket also sought damages of at least $75,000 from Jackpot.
Both parties agreed to a bench trial (as opposed to trial by jury) and Judge Lewis J. Liman presided over the case. On Dec. 29, the federal court for the Southern District of New York filed Judge Liman’s decision.
Judge dismisses Jackpocket’s claims
In his ruling, Judge Liman found that Jackpocket “failed to establish Defendants’ liability on any of its five asserted causes of action.” Put more plainly, Jackpocket “has not demonstrated that Jackpot.com has infringed its trademarks or that its other causes of action have merit.”
In civil lawsuits, the onus is on the plaintiff to prove its/their claim(s). In this instance, Judge Liman did not find that Jackpocket fulfilled its responsibility. As a result, Judge Liman dismissed Jackpocket’s lawsuit completely.
On Wednesday, Jackpocket filed a notice that it will appeal its loss. For the time being, though, Jackpot seems to have a clear path ahead of it and Jackpocket will have to deal with any possible brand confusion on its own.
