Opinion of the Court — AANP v. American Ass'n of Naturopathic Physicians

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: June 14, 2002
Case: AANP v. American Ass'n of Naturopathic Physicians
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

MEMORANDUM ** The American Association of Naturopathic Physicians of Oregon (“Infringer”), appeals a $52,133.44 award of attorneys’ fees granted in favor of the trademark owner, the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (“National AANP”). We review for an abuse of discretion an award of attorneys’ fees under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (a). Gracie v. Gracie, 217 F.3d 1060, 1071-72 (9th Cir.2000). Findings of fact underlying an award of attorneys’ fees are reviewed for clear error. Smith v. Jackson, 84 F.3d 1213, 1221 (9th Cir.1996). Pursuant to the Lanham Act, attorneys’ fees may be granted to the prevailing party in “exceptional cases” of trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (a). The Lanham Act does not define the term “exceptional,” but we have awarded attorneys’ fees in infringement cases where the infringement was “malicious, fraudulent, deliberate, or willful.” Playboy Enters., Inc. v. Baccarat Clothing Co., 692 F.2d 1272, *894 1276 (9th Cir.1982). Here, the district court expressly found this an “exceptional case” of trademark infringement: [T]he evidence confirms that the defendant acted deliberately to and intended to harm the plaintiff by using its mark.…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.