Are you looking for credentialed, qualified trademark survey companies to bolster your Milwaukee case or to rebut an allegation of infringement? Consider Keegan & Donato Consulting.
The principals of Keegan & Donato Consulting – Mark Keegan and Tony Donato – have over 25 years of combined expertise in designing, executing and critiquing consumer research studies in the context of litigation, and have a solid mix of strategic and analytical skills.
Mr. Keegan is a member of the New York and Connecticut Bar Associations. He has formulated complex litigation case strategies on behalf of clients and worked as a marketing strategist with top brands. He is also an AMA-designated Professional Certified Marketer.
Mr. Donato has a Master of Public Policy from Georgetown University and an extensive background in marketing, intellectual property, and consumer behavior cases covering trademark, copyright, consumer surveys, best efforts, advertising, business damages, and business ethics.
Could a Consumer Survey Make a Difference in Your Case?
Trademark litigation surveys provide direct evidence about consumer perceptions that can be difficult to establish by means of visual comparisons and expert testimony alone.
An expert can help determine, for example, whether or not competing marks are likely to confuse consumers; whether or not a descriptive mark has acquired secondary meaning; or whether or not one brand’s mark is likely to cause dilution of a competing mark.
Employing knowledgeable experts, such as Keegan & Donato Consulting, is imperative. The court may afford an overly broad survey little weight or deem it inadmissible when it fails to address the key issues in your case, even if based on an accepted methodology.
Consider Water Pik, Inc. v. Med-Systems, Inc., 726 F.3d 1142, 1144-50 (10th Cir. 2013), in which the court discusses the District Court’s ruling that the defendant’s survey results in this trademark infringement and unfair competition case were deemed “devoid of any probative value and therefore irrelevant,” and why the Court of Appeals agreed that the survey “had too many methodological flaws to be of any probative value.”
While the Lanham Act does not require litigants to introduce consumer surveys in trademark disputes, a number of Lanham Act decisions have noted the absence of such evidence.
The court, in Eagle Snacks, Inc. v. Nabisco Brands, Inc., 625 F.Supp. 583 (D.N.J.1985), noted that “failure of a trademark owner to run a survey to support its claims of brand significance and/or likelihood of confusion, where it has the financial means of doing so, may give rise to the inference that the contents of the survey would be unfavorable, and may result in the court denying relief.”
Don’t overlook the use of methodologically sound surveys to strengthen your trademark infringement case. They can be very influential in determining whether a likelihood of confusion exists, particularly in the absence of other persuasive evidence. They can also be instrumental in settlement negotiations.
Trademark survey companies like Keegan & Donato Consulting can help you develop a powerful strategy for your Milwaukee litigation. Get in touch with us today at (914) 967-9421 to find out more about our services.