Mine O'mine, Inc. v. Michael Calmese
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Michael Cálmese appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for Mine O’Mine (“MOM”) on its trademark infringement and unfair competition claims, and the district court’s award of attorney’s fees to MOM under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s summary judgment and for an abuse of discretion its award of attorney’s fees. Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139, 1149, 1156 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment for MOM on the parties’ cross-claims for trademark infringement and unfair competition because Cálmese failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to ownership of the mark and the likelihood of confusion. See Brookfield Commc’ns. v. W. Coast Entm’t. Corp., 174 F.3d 1036, 1046 (9th Cir.1999) (party claiming infringement must establish its right to a valid, protectable trademark); Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Sandlin, 846 F.2d 1175, 1178 (9th Cir.1988) (“The ultimate test for unfair competition is exactly the same as for trademark infringement: whether the public is likely to be deceived or confused by the…