JNJ v ARC: Remaining Claims and Counterclaims

By bmartin on May 16, 2008 3:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

So who can use the emblematic red cross?

Evidently the American Red Cross still can, but I found it a bit challenging to determine from the media and press releases the prevailing decisions that came down Wednesday in the case of Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. v. The American National Red Cross. So here's a tabulated form of the remaining or dismissed (struck-out) claims and counterclaims from US District Court Judge Rakoff.*

JNJ Claims	ARC Counterclaims	Counterclaims of Codefendents Water-Jel, Magla, Learning Curve, and FAO
~~Tortious interference by all defendants with plaintiffs' prospective economic advantage~~^† Tortious interference by ARC with plaintiffs' existing contractual relations ~~Unfair competition by all defendants~~ ~~Promissory estoppel against ARC^‡~~ ~~Unlawful dilution by all defendants of plaintiffs' federally protected trademark rights~~ ~~Unlawful dilution by all defendants of plaintiffs' trademark rights under New York law~~ Breach of contract by FAO Breach of contract by Water-Jel	~~Violation by JNJ of 18 U.S.C. § 706~~ ~~Cancellation of JNJ's trademark~~ ~~Unfair competition by JNJ~~	Invalidity of JNJ's trademark Cancellation of JNJ's trademark

*From the Annals of Neither Here Nor There, Judge Rakoff was the judge who ruled in 1997, just hours before a Knicks play-off game, that the NBA had the right to suspend Patrick Ewing and 4 teammates for joining an on-court brawl against the Miami Heat.

†In a prior ruling, the claim was limited to interference with JNJ's business relationships with retailers Target, Wal-Mart, Walgreens, and CVS.

‡Dismissed in a prior ruling.