Representative matters.

Trademark victories before the French courts and the INPI

D______ v. DROPS — earlier mark recognized as reputed (INPI)

The firm represented D______ in opposition No. OP 21-2978 before the INPI against the French application "DROPS" No. 4756479 (classes 40 and 42), filed by a battery company. In its decision of May 20, 2022, the INPI held that the earlier EU trademark D______ enjoys a strong reputation for electronic file-storage software, found the signs similar and a link in the mind of the public, and upheld the opposition in part on the basis of unfair advantage — rejecting the contested application for goods and services including electric batteries, software design and development, cloud computing and server hosting, even though the applicant had amended its specification to exclude software and electronic file storage. Read the INPI decision →

The F___ — cancellation of four French "Feed" marks (Paris Judicial Court)

The firm represented The F___ before the Paris Judicial Court in a trademark infringement and unfair-competition action against the French company O.K.R (formerly Feed). By judgment of February 18, 2026, the court canceled four French marks — "Feed" No. 4263593, "Feed.Smartfood" No. 4353219 and two semi-figurative "Feed" marks Nos. 4415661 and 4536098 — as infringing, by imitation, the earlier EU trademark "The F___" No. 12392651. The court awarded €179,416.41 in provisional damages plus €30,000 under Article 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, ordered the transfer of the infringing domain name, prohibited use of the signs "Feed", "Feed." and "The F___" throughout the European Union, and authorized publication of the judgment in four outlets plus a one-month notice on the defendant's homepage, all under daily penalties. Read the judgment →

C____ B____ v. Amazon — Amazon entity held liable for trademark infringement (Paris Judicial Court)

The firm represented C____ B____ Expansion, owner of the C____ B____ trademark, and C____ B____ Distribution, the French home-linen leader, before the Paris Judicial Court. By judgment of June 10, 2022 (No. 19/15002), Amazon Europe Core SARL was held liable for infringing the C____ B____ mark through its natural and paid search-engine referencing — using the mark as bait for pages offering only competing products — and Amazon's counterclaim to invalidate the mark was rejected, the court acknowledging its notoriety for home linen. The court issued an injunction under a €5,000-per-day penalty and ordered publication of the ruling in a banner on the amazon.fr home page for five consecutive days — a judicially ordered notice on the infringer's own marketplace. Read the judgment →

I____ v. Intelcam — I____ held to be a reputed mark; corporate-name change ordered

The firm represented I____ Corporation and its French subsidiary before the Paris Court of First Instance (Tribunal de grande instance). By judgment of February 3, 2017 (No. 16/11827), the court held that the French mark I____ No. 1194498 and the EU trademark I____ No. 513 are reputed marks, and that the use of "Intelcam" as a corporate and trade name infringed them. Intelcam was ordered to change its corporate name within two months under a daily penalty, and prohibited, under penalty, from any further use of "Intelcam", "I____" or any similar denomination. Read the judgment →

Other representative results

The results below are drawn from the firm's track record as published on gomis-lacker.fr. Client names are omitted.

Before the French courts — as plaintiff

• €117,000 in damages for infringement of a restaurant trademark — Paris Court of Appeal, January 30, 2015.
• Revocation of two adverse marks for lack of genuine use, affirmed on appeal — Versailles Court of Appeal, June 2, 2022.
• €435,000 in damages — Paris Court of Appeal, January 12, 2011.
• Exequatur (recognition and enforcement in France) of a U.S. judgment awarding more than $6,000,000 against a seller of devices circumventing technical protection measures.

Before the French courts — as defendant

• Facing claims of nearly €500,000: complete dismissal of all adverse claims, with €50,000 awarded to the client under Article 700 — Paris Court of Appeal, February 21, 2024.
• Cancellation of two adverse marks for lack of distinctive character, dismissal of the infringement and unfair-competition claims, and recognition of the client's right to use a generic term in a domain name — Paris Court of Appeal, November 15, 2006, affirmed by the French Supreme Court (Cass. com.), April 8, 2008.

Before the INPI

• Recognition of a mark's reputed status, with protection extended to dissimilar goods and services — INPI, May 20, 2022 (the D______ matter described above).
• Dismissal of an invalidity action, obtaining a reversal on the similarity of the signs relative to an earlier contrary decision — INPI, March 10, 2025, No. NL 24-0006.

Before the EUIPO

• Numerous favorable decisions before the Opposition Division and the Boards of Appeal since 2020, in proceedings conducted in English and in French.

Before the EU General Court

• Dismissal of a revocation action brought against the client's mark — EU General Court, December 20, 2023, T-27/23.
• Confirmation of the likelihood of confusion with the adverse mark — EU General Court, January 31, 2024, T-26/23.
• Both cases were argued on the same day — one in English, one in French.