Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Network Automation, Inc. v. Advanced Systems Concepts, Inc.

638 F.3d 1137 (9th Cir. 2011)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...

Network Automation, Inc. v. Advanced Systems Concepts, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

638 F.3d 1137 (9th Cir. 2011)

Facts

In 2000, Advanced Systems Concepts, Inc. (Systems) (defendant) began using the term ActiveBatch in connection with its job-scheduling-and-management software. Systems obtained trademark registration for the ActiveBatch mark in 2001. Network Automation, Inc. (Network) (plaintiff) was a direct competitor of Systems and marketed its own job-scheduling-and-management software to the same customers in the same marketing channels. Google offered a program called Google AdWords that allowed advertisers to purchase key words that, when entered into Google’s search engine, would return links to the advertisers’ products and services. Network purchased the keyword ActiveBatch so that sponsored results for Network’s service would be returned when web users searched for the term ActiveBatch. In 2009, Systems sent Network cease-and-desist letters requesting that Network stop using Systems’s trademark in commerce. Systems ultimately threatened litigation for trademark infringement. Network responded by filing a suit seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement. Systems counterclaimed, alleging trademark infringement and seeking a preliminary injunction. The district court issued a preliminary injunction, holding that a likelihood of consumer confusion existed and that Systems had a strong chance of succeeding on a claim of trademark infringement. Network appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wardlaw, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 28,700 briefs - keyed to 983 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership