C & T Newsletters
April 2025
High Price for Ignoring Trademark Complaint Over a Single $1 T-Shirt
Takeaway: An Australian student faces a $100,000 default judgment for allegedly infringing Grumpy Cat’s trademark with a single T-shirt sale, highlighting the critical importance of responding promptly to legal complaints to avoid severe penalties.
Alda Curtis, a 63-year-old counselling student from Sydney, got hit with a $100,000 default judgment after selling a single T-shirt on the Redbubble platform featuring a cartoon cat that Grumpy Cat Ltd. claimed infringed its trademark. Although Curtis earned little more than $1 from the sale and had licensed the design from a third-party website, she only learned of the lawsuit two weeks after the judgment had been entered.
United States trademark law allows for significant statutory damages, and default judgments are often used by rights holders to secure large awards without a full trial. Curtis is now seeking to have the judgment vacated, arguing she was not properly served, but faces procedural obstacles. Her experience highlights the significant risks faced by small online sellers and demonstrates the critical importance of responding promptly to any legal complaint in order to preserve the opportunity to defend against such claims.
A Practical Guide to Copyright Registration from the U.S. Copyright Office
Takeaway: The U.S. Copyright Office’s Copyright Registration Toolkit is a clear, accessible guide that empowers individuals to protect their work through registration—an essential step for enforcing rights as creators and businesses.
This month, the U.S. Copyright Office released the Copyright Registration Toolkit, a user-friendly, visually engaging guide designed to help first-time registrants and creators of all kinds understand and protect their intellectual property rights. Released as part of the Office’s 2022 “Copyright for All” initiative, the 23-page publication intends to demystify the copyright system. It offers a clear, visual breakdown of copyright law, detailing the distinctions between copyrights, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets. It walks users through the essentials of copyright protection, the steps to prepare and file an application, and the post-registration considerations. Importantly, the toolkit emphasizes that formal registration is necessary to enforce rights in federal court and to be eligible for statutory damages and attorney’s fees in infringement cases.
You can find this guide on the U.S. Copyright Website here: https://www.copyright.gov/intellectual-property-toolkits/copyright-registration-toolkit.pdf?loclr=eanco
Federal Circuit Rules “iVoterGuide” Trademark Too Descriptive to Protect
Takeaway: The Federal Circuit ruled that the Heritage Alliance’s “iVoterGuide” trademarks are too highly descriptive to be protected, affirming they lacked distinctiveness despite potential confusion with a similar mark.
The Federal Circuit ruled that the Heritage Alliance’s trademarks “iVoterGuide” and “iVoterGuide.com” are highly descriptive and not protectable, affirming a prior decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). This means the American Policy Roundtable (APR) can continue using “iVoters” and “iVoters.com,” even though there might be confusion between the marks.
The court agreed with the TTAB that the marks did not acquire distinctiveness in the eyes of the public, which is especially hard to prove for highly descriptive terms. The term “iVoterGuide” was found to plainly describe an internet-based voter guide, and Heritage did not offer convincing evidence of alternative meanings or consumer recognition.
Although APR did not address the likelihood of confusion, the descriptiveness of Heritage’s marks outweighed that issue. The court left open the question of whether APR’s own marks should be reviewed or canceled in the future.
APR’s attorney called the decision a significant win, emphasizing that highly descriptive marks are difficult to protect due to the high bar for establishing secondary meaning or acquired distinctiveness.
USPTO Unveils AI-Powered Plans to Combat Trademark Fraud and Speed Up Trademark Application Reviews
Takeaway: The USPTO is developing a fraud detection algorithm and integrating AI to improve efficiency, reduce trademark application review times, and combat fraudulent trademark filings.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is developing a fraud detection algorithm to identify suspicious trademark applications, aiming to streamline processing and reduce review times. Announced during its “USPTO Hour” webinar, the initiative addresses issues such as fake attorney credentials and digitally altered evidence. The agency has historically presumed applicants’ good faith but is now shifting to increased scrutiny.
USPTO also plans to integrate AI and machine learning to improve efficiency. A key goal is to reduce the time for initial application review from nearly seven months to 4.5 months by fiscal year 2027.
Currently, there are over 411,000 unexamined applications—down from a 2022 peak of 550,000—with a 2025 target of 383,000. These improvements are supported by increased hiring and examiner incentives. The office is also addressing fraudulent patent filings with a new monitoring group as well.
UAE Launches Groundbreaking AI-Powered Legal System to Accelerate Lawmaking and Reform
Takeaway: The UAE has become one of the first countries to launch an AI-powered regulatory ecosystem, aiming to accelerate lawmaking by up to 70% and create a more responsive, data-driven legal system aligned with global best practices.
The UAE Cabinet has approved the establishment of a Regulatory Intelligence Office and an AI-powered integrated legal ecosystem, making the UAE one of the first countries in the world to adopt this innovative approach. This system will use artificial intelligence to monitor the real-time impact of legislation on society and the economy, recommend updates, and accelerate the drafting and implementation of laws by up to 70%. It will also create a unified legislative map that links federal and local laws with court decisions, executive procedures, and public services. By connecting to global policy research centers, the UAE aims to align its laws with international best practices and set a new standard in AI-driven governance. This move is part of the country’s broader strategy to lead in legal-tech and enhance the efficiency, precision, and responsiveness of its legal system.
Ninth Circuit Revisits Default Judgment Rules on Damages and Attorney Fees
Takeaway: The Ninth Circuit ruled that plaintiffs can recover substantial damages and attorney fees in default judgments even without specifying exact amounts in their complaint, highlighting that general requests for relief “to be proven at trial” satisfy Rule 54(c) — a key takeaway for litigants seeking full remedies after defaults.
The Ninth Circuit recently issued an important ruling in AirDoctor LLC v. Xiamen Qichuang Trade Co. Ltd., reviving AirDoctor’s claim for $2.5 million in damages and $50,000 in attorney(s)’ fees following a default judgment against a competitor in a trademark and unfair competition case. The case is particularly interesting because it clarifies how much money and attorney(s)’ fees can be awarded in default judgments when those amounts were not specifically pled in the initial complaint. A lower court had denied the damages request under Rule 54(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguing that default judgments cannot exceed what is demanded in the pleadings. But the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding that AirDoctor’s general request for damages “to be proven at trial” met the rule’s requirements.
The court emphasized that plaintiffs are not required to list exact damage amounts in their complaint to later recover them in default, as long as the type of relief sought is consistent. The decision adds clarity to the scope of recoverable damages and attorney(s)’ fees in default judgment cases within the Ninth Circuit.
Supreme Court Declines to Address 9th Circuit “Server Test,” Limiting Copyright Protections for Embedded Content
Takeaway: The U.S. Supreme Court let stand the Ninth Circuit’s “server test,” reinforcing a legal divide that allows websites to embed copyrighted content without liability if it’s not hosted on their own servers—a decision that leaves content creators with fewer protections online within the 9th Circuit.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear photographer Elliot McGucken’s appeal challenging the Ninth Circuit’s “server test,” which holds that websites do not infringe copyright by embedding photos not hosted on their own servers. McGucken sued Canadian media company Valnet for embedding 36 of his Instagram photos, but lower courts dismissed the case under the “server test.” His petition argued the test allows widespread infringement and creates inconsistent copyright standards across U.S. courts. The Ninth Circuit reaffirmed the test’s validity in McGucken’s and prior cases, while some courts outside the Ninth Circuit have rejected it. The Supreme Court gave no reason for denying the appeal.
Court Dismisses Copyright Lawsuit Over Superman, Citing Lack of Jurisdiction
Takeaway: A New York federal judge dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Mark Warren Peary on behalf of his late uncle’s estate against DC Comics, ruling the court lacked jurisdiction, underscoring the importance of proper legal grounds and jurisdiction when filing a lawsuit.
A New York federal judge dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Mark Warren Peary, the nephew and executor of Superman co-creator Joseph Shuster’s estate, against DC Comics and Warner Bros. Discovery, citing a lack of jurisdiction. U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman ruled that diversity jurisdiction was not satisfied because both Peary, representing Shuster’s California-based estate, and DC Comics, whose partnership includes a California citizen, were considered California citizens, defeating complete diversity.
The court also found that Peary could not establish federal-question jurisdiction, as the issues he raised under international copyright law and the Declaratory Judgment Act were too case-specific to invoke federal jurisdiction. Peary had sought to stop the companies’ alleged unauthorized use of Superman’s foreign copyrights in Canada, the UK, Ireland, and Australia, particularly ahead of the upcoming July release of a new Superman film. However, the judge concluded the dispute did not meet the standards necessary for the court to hear it, ending the case without addressing the underlying infringement claims.
Cislo & Thomas LLP Spotlight
INTA 2025: On our way to connect with international attorneys in San Diego!
As a reminder. Cislo & Thomas LLP will be exhibiting at the 147th Annual INTA Conference in San Diego, California this year from May 18, 2025 through May 21, 2025 and holding meetings at our Booth No. 1949 at the INTA Conference Center. We are looking forward to presenting in our home state. If you plan to attend, please come by and see us!
Previous Newsletters
