Trading Technologies drops lawsuit against Vela Trading Technologies
Trading Technologies mentioned no reasons for the dismissal of the trademark infringement case against Vela Trading Technologies LLC at the Illinois Northern District Court.
A brief update to FinanceFeeds’ earlier article about Trading Technologies suing Vela Trading Technologies over trademark infringement…
Recent document filings with the Illinois Northern District Court show that the case was dismissed by Trading Technologies. In its notice with the Court, the company mentions no reasons for its decision. It notes, however, that the dismissal is voluntary.
Trading Technologies had accused Vela Trading Technologies of trade name and trademark infringement, unfair competition, false designation of origin, deceptive trade practices, and consumer fraud. In particular, the move centered around the following trademarks: TT, TRADING TECHNOLOGIES, TT CAMPUSCONNECT, TT CVD and TT ANALYTICS.
In its complaint, which is now dismissed, Trading Technologies accused Vela Trading Technologies of unauthorized use of similar terms VELA TRADING TECHNOLOGIES, Vela Trading Tech and Vela_TT for nearly identical products and services.
From 2007 until 2016, the defendant operated as Street Response Laboratories (aka SR Labs) and has had Trading Technologies as its customer since 2012. On or around June 20, 2016, the defendant changed its corporate and trade name to Vela Trading Technologies LLC.
Trading Technologies had also noted the recent acquisitions by Vela Trading Technologies of OptionsCity Software, a company that provides futures and options trading and analytics solutions, and of Object Trading, a provider of a Direct Market Access (DMA) platform. Trading Technologies alleges that these deals will allow Vela Trading Technologies to compete more directly with Trading Technologies.
The Complaint stated that Vela Trading Technologies sought “to trade upon Trading Technologies’ goodwill and reputation in the computerized trading industry, make Defendant’s business appear to be part of Trading Technologies’ family of trading products and services, and to give Defendant’s products and services a salability they otherwise would not have.”
In addition, the Complaint stated that the Defendant’s use of the infringement trademarks could mislead consumers into believing that Defendant is sponsored by or affiliated with Trading Technologies, its products and services, and its TRADING TECHNOLOGIES and TT Marks.
The case is now officially terminated.
