Livestrong v. Kidstrong: Symbus Client Kidstrong Prevails in Trademark Bullying Case

We are pleased to report that the Livestrong Foundation has withdrawn its trademark opposition against our client Kidstrong Enterprises.

As we previously reported in this space, the Foundation filed an opposition against Kidstrong, alleging that Kidstrong’s application to register the trademark PROSTRONG, which covers dietary beverages, violated its rights in the mark LIVESTRONG. Kidstrong responded by filing an answer alleging, among other things, that the Foundation’s claims were unwarranted and that the Foundation was guilty of trademark bullying.

Kidstrong served several discovery requests on the Foundation, including several requests relating to its trademark bullying defense. The Foundation requested additional time to respond to the discovery requests and Kidstrong agreed. The parties engaged in settlement discussions, but Kidstrong refused to enter into any agreement limiting its rights in any way. Kidstrong also declined to consent to the withdrawal of the opposition, which would have given the Foundation the right to refile the opposition. The Foundation ultimately withdrew the opposition without Kidstrong’s consent and the opposition was dismissed “with prejudice.” As a result, the Foundation is precluded from challenging the registrabililty of the PROSTRONG mark in the future. According to Kidstrong’s counsel, Jan Bader, “Kidstrong is very pleased with the outcome of the opposition. Now that the proceeding has been withdrawn, Kidstrong can go about its business without further interference from Livestrong.”

While the Livestrong v. Kidstrong opposition is a single case in a sea of trademark bullying cases, the result of the opposition is important. The withdrawal of the opposition is a victory not only for Kidstrong, but for trademark bullying victims everywhere. The case shows that, in this case at least, standing up to trademark bullies works.

About the author

Evan A. Raynes

Evan A. Raynes, JD, has over 15 years of intellectual property experience, with an emphasis on trademark counseling, prosecution, and litigation. He has broad experience in all aspects of trademark counseling and prosecution, including domestic and foreign trademark clearance, portfolio management, licensing, and audits. Evan has also counseled clients on numerous domain name, copyright, patent, false advertising, trade secret, right of publicity, social media, privacy, and data security issues. In addition to his prosecution and counseling experience, Evan has substantial experience in intellectual property litigation. He has worked on a wide range of trademark, unfair competition, copyright, patent, and trade secret cases, including large cases for industry-leading companies. He has appeared before federal courts at the district court and appellate levels, and has substantial experience handling opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Evan also has substantial experience handling domain name disputes before the World Intellectual Property Organization. He has broad experience in electronic discovery in all types of intellectual property litigation. Prior to joining Symbus, Evan was a partner at the intellectual property law firm Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner and the general practice firm Roetzel & Andress.