The Fourth Circuit's FLANAX decision held that a Mexican trademark owner who never used its mark in U.S. commerce may nonetheless pursue Lanham Act unfair-competition and false-advertising claims — unsettling the conventional assumption that U.S. use is the price of admission.
The Second Circuit holds that Congress has not incorporated the famous-marks doctrine into the Lanham Act, then certifies the state-law question to New York's high court.
The Ninth Circuit recognizes a famous-marks exception to trademark territoriality, allowing a foreign mark to be protected in the United States when a substantial share of the relevant American market knows it.
The Federal Circuit holds that use of a mark abroad creates no priority in the United States, and that knowledge of a foreign mark does not by itself defeat good-faith domestic adoption.
