Sections
Academics
Programs and Events
Academics
Saul Lefkowitz Moot Court Competition




Now in its 23rd year, the Saul Lefkowitz Moot Court Competition is an annual event honoring Saul Lefkowitz, whose entire distinguished career was dedicated to the development of trademark and unfair competition law.  

The competition introduces law students to important issues arising in U.S. trademark and unfair competition law. Students develop their brief writing and oral advocacy skills in a mock courtroom experience.

The competition is open to teams of students from U.S. accredited law schools. Approximately 80 teams of law students participate in the competition each year.

Students are expected to:

  • Write a brief reflecting the issues in the Fact Pattern/Problem.
  • Argue the case in regional and national competitions before a panel of volunteer attorneys, judges from various district and other courts, members of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and jurists from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.


NEW this year! –  A new region, the Southwest Region, has been added and will hold its regional competition in Dallas, Texas.

The Regional Competition takes place in February in Atlanta, Dallas, Chicago, New York and San Francisco. Two teams from each of the regional competitions will advance to the National Finals in Washington, D.C. in March.


To enter the competition:

 

 Competition Materials and Important Dates

 
 

 2013-2014 Saul Lefkowitz Moot Court Competition Winners

 

National Finals Award Winners

  • Winning Team: UC Berkeley School of Law (Wilson Dunlavey, Christina Farmer)
  • Second Place Team: University of San Diego School of Law (Jillian Ewan, Brittany Zummer)
  • Dolores K. Hanna Best Brief Award: University of Houston Law Center (Grant Buchanan, Pierce Cox, Katherine James)
  • Second Place Brief: University of San Diego School of Law (Jillian Ewan, Brittany Zummer)
  • Best Oral Argument: Columbia University School of Law (Fiona Finlay-Hunt, Stephanie Piper, William Sears, Daniel Straus)
  • Second Place Oral Argument Team: The John Marshall Law School (Timothy James Oliver, Alex James Fawell)

 

Regional Award Winners

East – New York

  • First Place Team (total combined brief and oral argument scores): Boston College Law School (Team E-09-044: Isaac Kalish, Harrison Levy)
  • Second Place Team: Columbia University School of Law (Team E-20-091: Fiona Finlay-Hunt, Stephanie Piper, William Sears, Daniel Straus)
  • Third Place Team: Northeastern University School of Law (Team E-07-041: R. John Naranja, Scheagbe Mayumi Grigsby, Mery Pimentel, Jose Rafael Sanabria Baez)
  • Best Brief: Boston College Law School and Northeastern University School of Law
  • Best Oral Argument Team: Seton Hall University School of Law (Team: E-14-065: Daniel Worley, Cymetra Williams

Midwest – Chicago

  • First Place Team (total combined brief and oral argument scores): Chicago Kent College of Law  (Team MW-08-045: Sarah Aagaard, Ben Boroughf)
  • Second Place Team: The John Marshall Law School (Team MW-04-007: Timothy James Oliver, Alex James Fawell)
  • Third Place Team: University of Iowa College of Law (Team: SW-01-002: Laura Hupp, Allison Blake, Josh Haugo)
  • Best Brief: Chicago Kent College of Law 
  • Best Oral Argument Team: University of Iowa College of Law


Southeast – Atlanta

  • First Place Team (total combined brief and oral argument scores): University of Alabama School of Law (Team SE-07-049: Matthew Donze, David Beasley, Joshua Davenport, Tiffany Palmer)
  • Second Place Team: Emory University School of Law (Team SE-03-020: Michael Wiseman, Alyssa Baskam, Dana Schulman, David Stewart)
  • Third Place Team: Georgia State University College of Law (Team SE-01-009: Phillip Parham, Eric Connelly, Matthew Goings, Patricia Uceda)
  • Best Brief: University of Alabama School of Law
  • Best Oral Argument Team: University of Alabama School of Law


Southwest – Dallas

  • First Place Team (total combined brief and oral argument scores): University of Houston Law Center (Team SW-08-051: Grant Buchanan, Pierce Cox, Katherine James)
  • Second Place Team: University of Houston Law Center (Team SW-07-050: Brandon Bludau, Jason Beesinger, Shanice Newton)
  • Third Place Team: Creighton University School of Law (Team SW-05-033: Justin DiBona, Rachele Somma, Emily Tomek-McCarthy, Derek True)
  • Best Brief: University of Houston Law Center (Team SW-08-051: Grant Buchanan, Pierce Cox, Katherine James)
  • Best Oral Argument Team: Drake University School of Law (Team SW-02-004: Kyle Mendenhall, Tim Alberts, Kelsey Knight, Madelyn Smith)

West – San Francisco

  • First Place Team (total combined brief and oral argument scores): University of California at Berkeley (Team W-10-022: Christina Farmer, Wilson Dunlavey)
  • Second Place Team: University of San Diego School of Law (Team W-05-014: Brittany Zummer, Jillian Ewan)
  • Third Place Team: University of San Diego School of Law (Team W-04-013: Tory Smith, Kelsey Hathaway)
  • Best Brief: University of San Diego School of Law (Team W-05-014: Brittany Zummer, Jillian Ewan) : University of San Diego School of Law (Team W-05-014: Brittany Zummer, Jillian Ewan): University of San Diego School of Law (Team W-04-013: Tory Smith, Kelsey Hathaway) University of San Diego School of Law (Team W-05-014: Brittany Zummer, Jillian Ewan)
  • Best Oral Argument Team: University of Hawaii William S. Richardson School of Law (Team W-07-017: Nikki Yamauchi, Timothy Partelow, Sara Tsukamoto) University of Hawaii William S. Richardson School of Law (Team W-07-017: Nikki Yamauchi, Timothy Partelow, Sara Tsukamoto)
 

 Saul Lefkowitz Moot Court Competition FAQs

 
1. Can I enter the competition if I am matriculated part-time at my law school? 

Yes. Team members MUST be matriculated in a full- or part-time Juris Doctor (J.D.) program in the law school they represent. Proof of current registration in law school for each team member MUST be attached to the team's entry form. No team member may hold a law degree from a law school in the United States. Please refer to the Official Rules for more information.
2. Can an LL.M student enter the competition?

No. An LL.M student who has obtained his/her Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree may not enter the competition. However, if a student is pursuing a joint J.D./LL.M program, he/she may enter the competition.
3. Is my school allowed to enter more than one team in the competition? How many team members are allowed on a team?

Each school may enter up to TWO teams. The competition is open to teams of law school students from any United States law school so long as graduation from such school renders its students eligible for admission to a state bar in the United States.

Teams may consist of two, three or four students from the same school.

4. Is a team allowed to replace team members after submitting the team’s entry form?

INTA MUST receive the team’s completed entry form by October 18, 2013, 5:00 pm U.S. Eastern Time.

After submitting the entry form, a team is allowed to replace team members up until the filing of briefs on January 3, 2014, 11:59 pm U.S. Eastern Time. After this date, the team must receive consent from the Lefkowitz Committee by emailing lefkowitz@inta.org in order to replace team members.

A team replacing team members MUST submit proof of matriculation for new team members.

5. Is there a registration fee to enter the Competition?   

There is no registration fee to enter the competition but teams are responsible for their own travel expenses to the Regional Competition.

INTA will reimburse those teams that advance to the National Finals for their reasonable hotel and transportation expenses for attending the Finals, up to a maximum of $1,000 per team. All expenses must be submitted to INTA no later than March 24, 2014. After this date, INTA will not consider travel expenses for reimbursement and the team (or law school) will be responsible.

6. How many sides is a team expected to brief? How many sides is a team expected to argue during oral arguments?

Each team is randomly assigned one side to brief; the team will then brief all issues from that side’s perspective.

For oral arguments, each team will argue both sides.

7. Can briefs be emailed/mailed/hand delivered to INTA’s Office?

No. Briefs cannot be emailed, mailed or hand delivered to INTA. Each team shall file its brief as a PDF file by uploading it online. The brief must be received by INTA no later than January 3, 2014, 11:59 pm U.S. Eastern Time. Briefs received after this date may not be considered.

Briefs are not returned to the teams after the competition. Please refer to the Official Rules for more information.

8. Are past winning briefs shared with participating teams?

Past winning briefs ARE NOT shared but a copy of the current year’s Bench Memo is provided to each participating team after the National Competition.
9. Can one team member participate in the oral arguments at the Regional and National Competitions?

No. Each team MUST designate TWO team members to argue during oral arguments at the Regional and National Competitions.  
10. Can coaches and/or faculty advisors observe the oral arguments? 

Team members, coaches, faculty advisors or any other person affiliated with the team are permitted to attend ONLY those arguments in which that team is participating. Please refer to the Official Rules for more information.
11. Are individual and team scores released to students who participate in the competition? 

Individual and team scores ARE NOT released. After the National Finals, each team will be notified by email of its oral argument, brief, and overall rankings in its region and nationwide. Regional and National Finals winners, along with names of all participating schools, will be posted on the Lefkowitz page of INTA’s website at www.inta.org/lefkowitz after the National Finals.
 

 Lefkowitz Competition Sponsors

 
 

 INTA’s 2013 Lefkowitz East Regionals: Eric Aguayo Photography

 
 

 Lefkowitz Competition Designs