Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Southern Grouts & Mortars, Inc. v. 3M Co., No. 08-15850

By FindLaw Staff on July 23, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In an action for cybersquatting on a domain name identical to the name of plaintiff's product, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed where 1) the district court did not err in denying plaintiff leave to amend its complaint, because it waited to file a motion to amend its complaint with information it had known over a month before when it filed a motion for summary judgment; and 2) plaintiff failed to show that defendant had a bad faith intent to profit from using the domain name.

Read Southern Grouts & Mortars, Inc. v. 3M Co., No. 08-15850

Appellate Information

Filed July 23, 2009


Per Curiam

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard