Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Energizer Brands, LLC v. Proctor & Gamble Company, et al
Case Number:
4:16-cv-00223
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Judge:
Firms
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
October 27, 2017
Drumroll, Please! Duracell Wins Bunny Battle With Energizer
A Missouri federal judge Friday granted Duracell a win in a case brought by Energizer, which alleges that its battery rival's drum-banging pink bunny rips off its own iconic, unstoppable pink bunny, ruling that Duracell cannot control the U.S. stores that sell its batteries with bunnies on the packaging.
-
February 18, 2016
Energizer Says P&G's Duracell Ads Infringe Iconic Bunny
Energizer Brands LLC on Thursday hit rival Duracell U.S. Operations Inc. and its parent company, Procter & Gamble Co., with a Missouri federal suit claiming they infringe the trademark for Energizer's iconic, unstoppable, battery-powered bunny with advertising featuring Duracell's own pink bunny.