If you are looking for trademark infringement consultants to provide support for your IP litigation, Keegan & Donato Consulting can help.
Keegan & Donato Consulting has developed surveys for plaintiffs and defendants across the nation on issues related to likelihood of confusion, strength of mark, secondary meaning, acquired distinctiveness, dilution, genericness, false advertising, and many other topics within the fields of trademark and trade dress.
With a combined 25-plus years of experience in conducting consumer research studies, as well as membership in the International Trademark Association (INTA), the American Marketing Association (AMA), the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), and ESOMAR, the leading global association for market, social and opinion researchers, principals Mark Keegan and Tony Donato have wide-ranging skills and tools that can help you strengthen your case.
Our specialties include:
- Likelihood of Confusion Analysis & Surveys
- Strength of Mark Analysis & Surveys
- Secondary Meaning Analysis & Surveys
- Lanham Act Analysis & Surveys
- Trade Dress Analysis & Surveys
- Consumer Perception Analysis & Surveys
- Consumer Understanding Studies
- Marketing, damages and forensic economic analyses
- Expert Witness Testimony
- Critiqueof opposing experts’ studies and reports
- Advice on deposition and trial questioning of opposing experts
Why Expert Advice is Valuable
Expert advice can be critical for several reasons, such as in making the most of fact discovery, framing discovery requests, and identifying issues to investigate in depositions.
Primarily through survey evidence, an expert can help establish whether a descriptive mark has acquired secondary meaning; whether competing marks are likely to confuse consumers; whether or not a mark is famous; and whether one brand’s mark is likely to cause dilution to a competing mark.
While nothing in the Lanham Act requires consumer surveys to be introduced in disputes, they can serve as persuasive evidence of whether an advertisement or trademark is likely to cause consumers to be confused or misled. Consumer surveys must be well-designed and scientifically sound, however, or they may be given little weight by the court or partially or completed excluded.
For example, in Elliott v. Google, Inc., 45 F. Supp. 3d 1156 – Dist. Court, D. Arizona (2014), the court deemed the plaintiff’s surveys inadmissible after determining them to be unscientific and poorly constructed. The court also rejected the survey expert as unqualified “to design a survey or to interpret survey results” [see 45 F.Supp.3d 1167-1170].
In Dardenne v. MoveOn.org, Civil Action No. 14-00150-SDD-SCR, Dist. Court, M.D. Louisiana (2014), the court placed “little weight on the (plaintiff’s) survey results for the reason that the survey’s methodology was fundamentally flawed in both its sampling and the questions employed.”
Keegan & Donato Consulting can help you solve your biggest IP litigation and marketing research challenges with the actionable insight that can be gained from a consumer survey designed by highly qualified experts who can quickly deliver intelligence within a wide range of budgets.
When you need experienced consultants for a consumer survey that will support your trademark infringement case, you will appreciate the extraordinary expertise of Keegan & Donato Consulting. Get in touch with us at (914) 967-9421 to explore our capabilities.