No. 21-1043

Abitron Austria GmbH, et al. v. Hetronic International, Inc.

Lower Court: Tenth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-01-26
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: Paid
CVSGAmici (14)Relisted (3) Experienced Counsel
Tags: civil-procedure extraterritorial-application extraterritoriality foreign-sales lanham-act territorial-rights trademark trademark-infringement u.s.-commerce us-commerce
Key Terms:
Antitrust DueProcess Trademark Patent Copyright JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2022-11-04 (distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the court of appeals erred in applying the Lanham Act extraterritorially to petitioners' foreign sales, including purely foreign sales that never reached the United States or confused U.S. consumers

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED Petitioners—all foreign nationals—were subjected to a $90 million damages award under the Lanham Act, 15 US.C. $1051 et seq., for allegedly infringing respondent’s USS. trademarks. While trademark rights are distinctly territorial, the accused sales occurred almost entirely abroad. Of approximately $90 million in sales, 97% were purely foreign: They were sales in foreign countries, by foreign sellers, to foreign customers, for use in foreign countries, that never reached the United States or confused U.S. consumers. The Tenth Circuit nonetheless held that the Lanham Act applies extraterritorially to all of petitioners’ foreign sales. Recognizing that the circuits have splintered in this area, the Tenth Circuit adopted an expansive view that other courts, including the Fourth Circuit, have concededly rejected. Under the Tenth Circuit’s view, the Lanham Act applies extraterritorially whenever foreign defendants’ foreign conduct allegedly diverts foreign sales from a U.S. plaintiff. Such an effect, the court held, sufficiently affects U.S. commerce because it prevents foreign revenue from flowing into the U.S. economy. The question presented is: Whether the court of appeals erred in applying the Lanham Act extraterritorially to petitioners’ foreign sales, including purely foreign sales that never reached the United States or confused U.S. consumers. (i)

Docket Entries

2023-07-31
Judgment issued.
2023-06-29
Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-1043_7648.pdf'>opinion</a> of the Court, in which Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Jackson, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a concurring opinion. Sotomayor, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kagan and Barrett, JJ., joined.
2023-03-21
Argued. For petitioners: Lucas M. Walker, Washington, D. C. For United States, as amicus curiae: Masha G. Hansford, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Matthew S. Hellman, Washington, D. C.
2023-02-27
Reply of petitioners Abitron Austria GmbH, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2023-02-27
Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED.
2023-02-03
Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed). (Distributed)
2023-02-03
Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed. (Distributed)
2023-02-01
Brief amicus curiae of Stussy, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2023-01-31
Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed.
2023-01-31
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, March 21, 2023.
2023-01-27
Brief of respondent Hetronic International, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2023-01-18
The deferred joint appendix is to be filed on or before February 3, 2023.
2023-01-17
CIRCULATED
2023-01-12
Motion of respondent for an extension of time to file respondent's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including January 27, 2023.
2023-01-11
Motion of respondent for an extension of time filed.
2023-01-06
REMOVED from the argument calendar for Wednesday, March 1, 2023.
2022-12-28
Record received from the U.S.D.C. Western District of Oklahoma. Sealed records transmitted electronically. The remaining record is available on PACER.
2022-12-27
Brief amici curiae of German Law Professors, et al. filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amici curiae of Three Intellectual Property Law Professors in support of neither party filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of European Commission on Behalf of the European Union in support of neither party filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association in support of neither party filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of International Trademark Association in support of neither party filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of United States supporting neither party filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of Professor William S. Dodge in support of neither party filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of Professor Dr. Louis Pahlow filed.
2022-12-27
Brief amicus curiae of Professor Guido Westkamp filed.
2022-12-21
Brief amicus curiae of Federal Circuit Bar Association in support of neither party filed.
2022-12-21
Record received from the U.S.C.A. Tenth Circuit. Sealed portions of Appendix transmitted electronically. The remaining record is available on PACER.
2022-12-20
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. for the Tenth Circuit.
2022-12-19
Brief of petitioners Abitron Austria GmbH, et al. filed.
2022-12-19
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, March 1, 2023.
2022-12-13
The Clerk has approved the deferred method for filing of the joint appendix per Rule 26.4.
2022-12-09
Letter requesting permission to file the joint appendix using the deferred method pursuant to Rule 26.4 filed.
2022-12-02
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Abitron Austria GmbH, et al.
2022-11-04
Petition GRANTED.
2022-10-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/4/2022.
2022-10-13
Supplemental brief of petitioners Abitron Austria GmbH, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2022-10-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/28/2022.
2022-10-12
Supplemental brief of respondent Hetronic International, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2022-09-23
Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.
2022-05-02
The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.
2022-04-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/29/2022.
2022-04-12
Reply of petitioners Abitron Austria GmbH, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2022-04-01
Rule 29.6 Corporate Disclosure Statement filed with respect to Brief in Opposition of Respondent Hetronic International.
2022-03-28
Brief of respondent Hetronic International, Inc. in opposition filed.
2022-02-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 28, 2022.
2022-02-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 25, 2022 to March 28, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-01-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 25, 2022)
2021-12-15
Application (21A153) granted by Justice Gorsuch extending the time to file until January 21, 2022.
2021-12-09
Application (21A153) to extend further the time from December 22, 2021 to January 21, 2022, submitted to Justice Gorsuch.
2021-11-15
Application (21A153) granted by Justice Gorsuch extending the time to file until December 22, 2021.
2021-11-11
Application (21A153) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 22, 2021 to January 21, 2022, submitted to Justice Gorsuch.

Attorneys

Abitron Austria GmbH, et al.
Jeffrey Alan LamkenMoloLamken LLP, Petitioner
Jeffrey Alan LamkenMoloLamken LLP, Petitioner
Lucas Michael WalkerMoloLamken LLP, Petitioner
Lucas Michael WalkerMoloLamken LLP, Petitioner
American Bar Association
Deborah Delores Enix-RossAmerican Bar Association, Amicus
Deborah Delores Enix-RossAmerican Bar Association, Amicus
American Intellectual Property Law Association
Richard S. StocktonBanner & Witcoff, Ltd., Amicus
Richard S. StocktonBanner & Witcoff, Ltd., Amicus
European Commission on Behalf of the European Union
Neil Anthony Friedman PopovicSheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, Amicus
Neil Anthony Friedman PopovicSheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, Amicus
Federal Circuit Bar Association
Michael Robert FranzingerSidley Austin LLP, Amicus
Michael Robert FranzingerSidley Austin LLP, Amicus
German Law Professors
John Lee Shepherd Jr.Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Amicus
John Lee Shepherd Jr.Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Amicus
Hetronic International, Inc.
Matthew S. HellmanJenner & Block LLP, Respondent
Matthew S. HellmanJenner & Block LLP, Respondent
Intellectual Property Owners Association
Theodore H. Davis Jr.Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Amicus
Theodore H. Davis Jr.Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Amicus
International Trademark Association
Lawrence K. NodineBallard Spahr, LLP, Amicus
Lawrence K. NodineBallard Spahr, LLP, Amicus
Professor Dr Louis Pahlow
Paul F. EnzinnaEllerman Enzinna PLLC, Amicus
Paul F. EnzinnaEllerman Enzinna PLLC, Amicus
Professor Guido Westkamp
William James CooperConrad | Metlitzky | Kane LLP, Amicus
William James CooperConrad | Metlitzky | Kane LLP, Amicus
Professor William S. Dodge
Michael R. DreebenGeorgetown University Law Center, Amicus
Michael R. DreebenGeorgetown University Law Center, Amicus
Stussy, Inc.
John R. SommerJohn R. Sommer, Attorney-at-Law, Amicus
John R. SommerJohn R. Sommer, Attorney-at-Law, Amicus
Three Intellectual Property Law Professors
Timothy R. HolbrookEmory University School of Law, Amicus
Timothy R. HolbrookEmory University School of Law, Amicus
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Amicus
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Amicus