Cease and Desist

The “first shot” fired in any trademark dispute is a cease and desist letter. This letter outlines our client’s rights and the reason why the infringing party should stop using the name or logo that infringes upon such rights. Our goal in sending a cease and desist letter is to stop the infringer if we believe there is a legitimate dispute. Sometimes a client will act on emotions and not on the strength of his or her rights. Since we always strive to strike a balance between zealous and cost-effective representation, we often counsel our clients not to initiate a cease and desist letter when their rights are inferior to the alleged infringer. Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor.

Litigation

If we are not able to resolve a trademark dispute through non-judicial methods, then we can and will initiate litigation in federal court to enforce our clients’ trademark rights. We take litigation very seriously and we do not initiate or defend lawsuits for the purposes of generating revenues. We understand that litigation is like waging war and there is a heavy financial burden that will be borne by our clients. As a result, we thoroughly evaluate our clients’ claims and often recommend a quick and cost-effective settlement strategy whenever possible.

When we do get involved in litigation on behalf of our clients, we are both aggressive and efficient. We utilize technology and our considerable litigation experience to bring the best possible results to our clients with the least cost. Our litigators have vast experience in all aspects of trademark litigation from discovery to law and motion to trial. If we do “go to war”, you can rest assured that you will be represented by attorneys that have experience in battle.

Anti-Counterfeiting

As part of our litigation services, our attorneys have significant experience counseling clients regarding anti-counterfeiting issues and litigation regarding such matters. IPLA’s attorneys have been involved in anti-counterfeiting disputes not only in the United States, but foreign countries. Our experience includes representing the world’s largest diamond grading institution against a ring of worldwide counterfeiters who were selling diamonds with counterfeit diamond grading reports. Through a coordinated effort that spanned three countries (U.S., Italy and Israel), we were able to secure seizure orders against the counterfeiting ring resulting in both civil and criminal penalties. We have also worked with Customs Departments in the U.S., Europe, Australia, Africa, and Asia to seize counterfeit goods for our clients. As with all of our services, we strive to deliver meaningful anti-counterfeiting services that make good business sense rather than generate revenues to our law firm. This is what makes IPLA unique amongst its peers.