In affirming the grant of summary judgment that Sukumar had not demonstrated standing to bring a false marking claim against Nautilus, the court determined the meaning of the term “competitive injury” in Section 292(b) of the false marking statute, as amended by the AIA.  The court held that a potential competitor may suffer competitive injury if it has attempted to enter the market.  An attempt to enter the market is made up of two components: (1) intent to enter the market with a reasonable probability of success, and (2) an action to enter the market.  The court held that Sukumar had not demonstrated that he had attempted to enter the market, as he had not demonstrated either prong of the test. 

Sukumar v. Nautilus, Inc., Case No. 2014-1205 (May 4, 2015); Opinion by: Prost, joined by Newman and Reyna; Appealed From: District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Turk, J.  Read the full opinion here.

Jump to Page