On January 13, 2026, a battery charger company petitioned the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a jury’s decision that awarded approximately $20 million in damages for alleged trademark infringement. The company contends that its use of generic product descriptions in Amazon advertisements did not infringe upon a competitor’s trademark and did not lead to consumer confusion.
The case centers on the company’s advertising practices on Amazon, where it utilized product descriptions that the plaintiff claims were deceptively similar to its own trademarked terms. The jury previously found in favor of the plaintiff, concluding that the advertisements were likely to cause confusion among consumers and thus constituted trademark infringement.
In its appeal, the defendant argues that the terms used in its advertisements are generic and commonly used within the industry to describe similar products. The company maintains that such generic usage does not violate trademark laws, which are designed to protect distinctive brand identifiers rather than common descriptive terms. Furthermore, the defendant asserts that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that consumers were misled or confused by the advertisements in question.
This appeal highlights the ongoing legal challenges in distinguishing between generic terms and protected trademarks, especially in the context of online advertising. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for how companies market their products on e-commerce platforms and the extent to which generic terms can be used without infringing on existing trademarks.
The Eleventh Circuit’s decision will be closely watched by legal professionals and businesses alike, as it may provide further clarity on the boundaries of trademark protection in the digital marketplace.