Uber Inc. v. Uber Technologies Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41014 (2021)
- Written by Sara Adams, JD
Facts
Uber, Inc. (plaintiff) was a marketing and advertising business that opened in 1999 and used the unregistered mark “Uber.” Uber Technologies, Inc. (defendant) began as a ride-sharing service in 2010 and later began providing other services. Uber Technologies became publicly associated with the mark “Uber.” Uber, Inc., began receiving communications and shipments intended for Uber Technologies. In 2019 Uber Technologies and Adomni, Inc. (defendant) publicly announced plans to expand into the advertising industry. Uber, Inc., filed a lawsuit against Uber Technologies and Adomni in federal district court for claims including reverse confusion. Uber, Inc., asserted that it would be in close competitive proximity with Uber Technologies and Adomni. Uber, Inc.’s complaint referenced Uber Technologies’ and Adomni’s public statements confirming their intent to provide advertising services and their trademark-registration application, which specifically sought to register the “Uber” mark for use in advertising endeavors. Uber, Inc.’s complaint did not cite any specific instances of actual consumer confusion. Uber Technologies and Adomni filed a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguing that Uber, Inc., had failed to plausibly allege facts to show close competitive proximity or actual consumer confusion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Castel, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 782,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.