Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Pro-Football, Inc. v. Harjo

565 F.3d 880 (D.C. Cir. 2009)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 26,900+ case briefs...

Pro-Football, Inc. v. Harjo

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia

565 F.3d 880 (D.C. Cir. 2009)

Facts

Pro-Football, Inc. (PFI) (defendant) was the corporate owner of the Washington Redskins football team. PFI registered six trademarks that include the word Redskin. Five of the marks were registered in or prior to 1978, and the most recent one was registered in 1990. The last trademark was for the word Redskinnettes. In 1992, seven Native Americans (plaintiffs) petitioned for cancellation of the registrations, alleging that the term Redskin disparaged Native Americans. One of the plaintiffs, Mateo Romero, was born in 1966. The plaintiffs prevailed before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, which cancelled the marks. PFI appealed to the trial court. The trial court granted summary judgment to PFI based on the doctrine of laches and a lack of substantial evidence to show disparagement. The plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which reversed and remanded for additional evidence regarding whether Romero’s claim was barred by laches. The former Redskins president, Edward Bennett Williams, died during the eight year period between Romero turning 18 and filing this claim. Williams met with Native American leaders around the time of registration of the marks to discuss their views. PFI significantly expanded merchandising and investment in the trademarks during that eight year period, as well. The trial court determined that Romero’s claim was barred by laches based on economic and trial prejudice. Romero appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Tatel, 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 541,000 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 541,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 26,900 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 541,000 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
  • 26,900 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