In a recent trademark litigation, lottery platforms Jackpot.com and Jackpocket were pitted against each other. A panel comprising of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a district court decision admonishing Jackpocket’s claim against Jackpot.com. The panel unanimously held that the term ‘jackpot’ is generally understood and used within the lottery and gaming industry, thus making it generic and ineligible for trademark protection. Learn more about it here.
Represented by Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, Jackpocket filed a suit against Jackpot.com in 2022. The claim, as put forward by Jackpocket, was that Jackpot.com intentionally chose a similar brand name to misguide and confuse customers, especially as it was making its way into the American market.
The court’s decision came promptly with a 12-page summary order released merely two weeks post the oral arguments. The panel, including Circuit Judges John M. Walker Jr., William Nardini, and Steven Menashi, ratified Judge Liman’s prior judgment, rebuffing Jackpocket’s case against Jackpot.com. As the term ‘jackpot’ is seen as generic in the lottery and gaming sphere, it cannot be trademarked, essentially barring any charges based on consumer confusion surrounding similar brand names.