The Legal Advisor: Spring Update – Shustak & Partners, P.C.
Partner Erwin Shustak Becomes a Lifetime Member of the Million Dollar and Multi-Million Dollar Advocate Forums
We are pleased to announce that our Managing Partner, Erwin J. Shustak, has become a lifetime member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum and the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum, based on the multi-million dollar recoveries he has obtained on behalf of Firm clients over the years. Established in 1993, the Million Dollar Advocates Forum (which includes the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum) is one of the most prestigious groups of trial lawyers in the United States. Membership is limited to attorneys who have won million and multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements. There are over 4000 members throughout the country. Fewer than 1% of U.S. lawyers are members. Membership in the Forums includes many of the top trial lawyers in the country who have each demonstrated, in an objective and tangible way, their ability to accomplish superior results in complex cases. Certification by the Million Dollar and Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum provides recognition of such accomplishment and a national network of experienced colleagues for information exchange, assistance and professional referral.
FINRA Broker Expungement Rules – 2015 Update
In the past several years, FINRA, the Securities and Exchange Commission and a number of investor protection groups, including PIABA (the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association), have made a concerted effort to expand and publicize the availability of broker background and CRD records (known as “BrokerCheck”) on the FINRA portal (www.finra.org) and to make the BrokerCheck portal more robust, user friendly and transparent. As a result, more and more of the investing public is aware of, and routinely accesses the BrokerCheck feature on the FINRA web portal to investigate the background of a prospective or existing registered representative. What information appears on a broker’s BrokerCheck, therefore, has become increasingly important to all registered representatives, particularly those with negative disclosure items on their CRD reports, who have an increased desire to seek to expunge some or all of the disclosure items from their CRD and BrokerCheck records […] read more.
Trademark Update: The Primary Importance of Secondary Meaning: Attacking Lack of Secondary Meaning on Summary Judgment
By Jeffrey T. Petersen, Esq., Partner
“To establish secondary meaning, a manufacturer must show that, in the minds of the public, the primary significance of [the] term is to identify the source of the product rather than the product itself.”
Inwood Labs, Inc. v. Ives Labs., Inc., 456 U.S. 844, 851 n. 11 (1982) (emphasis supplied).
A trademark that is classified as “descriptive” must have secondary meaning in order to be protectable. i.e., consumers must have come to associate the mark with the source of plaintiff’s goods or services. The fact-dependent nature of the secondary meaning inquiry (i.e., the length of use of the mark, advertising and sales levels of goods and services exhibiting the mark, etc.) may make it seem that there is only a remote chance of obtaining summary judgment on the ground that a descriptive mark is not legally protectable due to the absence of secondary meaning.
But the summary judgment case law in this area shows defendants have had a degree of success with this argument, as the courts have maintained that, in the appropriate circumstances, the plaintiff must satisfy “vigorous evidentiary requirements” to raise a question of fact on the existence of secondary meaning in a summary judgment proceeding. Thus, in a number of cases, even when a plaintiff’s mark has been used for years, with significant advertising and sales, the courts have held still granted summary judgment on the ground that secondary meaning could not be established.[1]
[1] Note that in these cases, the marks being challenged had not been deemed incontestable under 15 U.S.C. § 1065 (mark deemed incontestable under certain circumstances if used continuously for five years after registration); this preliminary issue should be examined before moving for summary judgment.
Read full article
Shustak & Partners Wins LawSuits for a Second Time!
Shustak & Partners wins LawSuits! For the second consecutive year, Shustak & Partners won the small firm category of LawSuits — a competitive cash and clothing drive organized by Second Chance and Chaired by District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis. We collected 24 suits and $550 in cash donations to help put San Diego residents back to work with appropriate business clothing. Thanks to all who donated and participated!