Under Armour sufficiently alleged that it owns a valid mark, that Exclusive used the mark without Under Armour’s authorization in connection with the sale of its goods, and that its use of the mark is likely to confuse consumers, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland said.
Under Armour owns several valid, registered marks, including the ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.