Representative matters.

Named matters

The clients below have authorized the firm to identify them.

Dropbox, Inc. — DROPBOX recognized as a mark with a reputation (INPI)

The firm represented Dropbox, Inc. in opposition No. OP 21-2978 before the INPI against the French application "DROPS" No. 4756479 (classes 40 and 42), filed by a battery company. In its decision of May 20, 2022, the INPI held that Dropbox's earlier EU trademark DROPBOX enjoys a strong reputation for electronic file-storage software, found the signs similar and a link in the mind of the public, and upheld the opposition in part on the basis of unfair advantage — rejecting the contested application for goods and services including electric batteries, software design and development, cloud computing and server hosting, even though the applicant had amended its specification to exclude software and electronic file storage.

The Feed.com — cancellation of four French "Feed" marks (Paris Judicial Court)

The firm represented The Feed.com before the Paris Judicial Court in a trademark infringement and unfair-competition action against the French company O.K.R (formerly Feed). By judgment of February 18, 2026, the court canceled four French marks — "Feed" No. 4263593, "Feed.Smartfood" No. 4353219 and two semi-figurative "Feed" marks Nos. 4415661 and 4536098 — as infringing, by imitation, the earlier EU trademark "The Feed" No. 12392651. The court awarded €179,416.41 in provisional damages plus €30,000 under Article 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, ordered the transfer of the infringing domain name, prohibited use of the signs "Feed", "Feed." and "The Feed" throughout the European Union, and authorized publication of the judgment in four outlets plus a one-month notice on the defendant's homepage, all under daily penalties.

Carré Blanc v. Amazon — Amazon held liable for trademark infringement (Paris Judicial Court)

The firm represented Carré Blanc, the French home-linen brand [VERIFY: exact corporate name of the represented entity], before the Paris Judicial Court. By judgment of June 10, 2022, Amazon was held liable for trademark infringement [VERIFY: docket number; Amazon entities held liable; damages awarded]. The court ordered publication of the decision on amazon.fr — a judicially ordered notice on the infringer's own marketplace. [VERIFY: exact scope and duration of the publication measure.]

Intel Corporation v. Intelcam

GOMIS & LACKER represented Intel Corporation in proceedings against the sign "Intelcam" [VERIFY: office or court — INPI, EUIPO or French court]. The matter was decided in Intel's favor [VERIFY: decision number, date and concrete outcome].

Other representative results

The results below are drawn from the firm's track record as published on gomis-lacker.fr. Client names are omitted.

Before the French courts — as plaintiff

• Recognition of a trademark's reputed status, finding of infringement, injunction ordering the defendant to change its corporate name, and prohibition of use under penalty — Paris Judicial Court, February 3, 2017.
• €117,000 in damages for infringement of a restaurant trademark — Paris Court of Appeal, January 30, 2015.
• Revocation of two adverse marks for lack of genuine use, affirmed on appeal — Versailles Court of Appeal, June 2, 2022.
• €435,000 in damages — Paris Court of Appeal, January 12, 2011.
• Exequatur (recognition and enforcement in France) of a US judgment awarding more than $6,000,000 against a seller of devices circumventing technical protection measures.

Before the French courts — as defendant

• Facing claims of nearly €500,000: complete dismissal of all adverse claims, with €50,000 awarded to the client under Article 700 — Paris Court of Appeal, February 21, 2024.
• Cancellation of two adverse marks for lack of distinctive character, dismissal of the infringement and unfair-competition claims, and recognition of the client's right to use a generic term in a domain name — Paris Court of Appeal, November 15, 2006, affirmed by the French Supreme Court (Cass. com.), April 8, 2008.

Before the INPI

• Recognition of a mark's reputed status, with protection extended to dissimilar goods and services — INPI, May 20, 2022 (the Dropbox matter described above).
• Dismissal of an invalidity action, obtaining a reversal on the similarity of the signs relative to an earlier contrary decision — INPI, March 10, 2025, No. NL 24-0006.

Before the EUIPO

• Eight favorable decisions before the Opposition Division and the Boards of Appeal since 2020, in proceedings conducted in English and in French.

Before the EU General Court

• Dismissal of a revocation action brought against the client's mark — EU General Court, December 20, 2023, T-27/23.
• Confirmation of the likelihood of confusion with the adverse mark — EU General Court, January 31, 2024, T-26/23.
• Both cases were argued on the same day — one in English, one in French.