San Diego, CA — A federal jury awarded $34.9 million to a pharmaceutical company following a heated four-day trial concerning trademark disputes over specialized post-surgical eyedrops. The verdict, handed down on Wednesday in a San Diego courtroom, addressed allegations of trademark infringement involving compounded ophthalmic medications.
These medications are custom mixes specifically prepared to meet the unique needs of individual patients, particularly beneficial in eye care treatments. Carlsbad-based ImprimisRx LLC, which brought the lawsuit, claimed they pioneered the market with these unique formulations, each safeguarded under its own trademark.
ImprimisRx LLC argued that competitor OSRX Inc., headquartered in Missoula, Montana, had unlawfully used similar trademarked names for its products. In some instances, OSRX altered trademarked names only by substituting dashes with plus signs. The allegations against OSRX included fraud, malice, oppression, and common law unfair competition, which allowed ImprimisRx to seek punitive damages.
Represented by Dylan J. Liddiard of the law firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, OSRX defended its case by asserting that the disputed trademarks were either generic or merely descriptive without secondary meaning, hence unprotectable. OSRX also contended that no customer confusion had occurred from these names, therefore, no actual damages were incurred. They further pressed a fair use defense during the trial.
However, co-lead plaintiff’s counsel, Keith J. Wesley from Ellis George LLP, stated that the defense’s attempts to undermine the trademarks ultimately did not withstand the jury’s scrutiny. “The array of defenses put forth by OSRX essentially aimed to invalidate the trademarks,” Wesley said, reflecting on the defense’s strategies. “However, the jury’s decision vividly underscored the perceived intentional wrongdoing by the defendant.”
After deliberating, the jury found in favor of ImprimisRx LLC on all fronts, awarded $10.5 million for actual damages concerning seven of the trademarks, an additional $4 million for the remaining two, and concluded with a hefty $20.4 million in punitive damages.
“The size of this verdict speaks volumes about the jury’s perspective on the defendant’s intent to cause harm,” noted Wesley.
Christopher W. Arledge, another principal attorney representing the plaintiff, along with Judge Cynthia Ann Bashant who presided over the case, contributed to the noteworthy resolution of this convoluted legal battle.
The case was documented under the official record ImprimisRX LLC and Harrow IP LLC v. OSRX, Inc.; Ocular Science, Inc., initiated in July 2021, tracking case number 21-CV-01305-BAS-(DDL) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
This article, automatically generated by Open AI, involves participants and details that may not be accurate. For corrections or removal requests, please contact contact@publiclawlibrary.org.