Vulcan Golf, LLC v. Google Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• declining to assess whether trademark was protectable at the motion to dismiss stage
• “Article III standing issues are inherently 10 intertwined with the class certification determination due to the 11 plaintiffs’ invocation of the juridical link doctrine.”
• “Businesses have standing to sue under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Trade Practices Act to redress competitive injury they suffer when other businesses deceive customers.”
• “Given the factual inquiry necessary to determine whether a trademark is ‘famous’ for purposes of this Act, the court declines to make such a determination on a motion to dismiss[.]”
• “[T]he ‘likelihood of confusion’ is a fact-specific inquiry best left for decision after discovery.”
• “This type of factual determination is wholly inappropriate at the motion to dismiss stage.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).