/PRNewswire/ - Oved and Oved LLP has achieved a major success representing its client The Lawfare Project Inc. a nonprofit organization after Southern District Court Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein confirmed that the opposing party is not eligible for attorney fees tied to Lawfare's copyright claim.

The lawsuit Zioness Movement Inc. v. The Lawfare Project Inc. 21-cv-7429 (AKH) stemmed from a disagreement about rights to the Zioness trademark which Lawfare funded to design develop and market. The conflict started after Lawfare's prior staff member Amanda Berman established ZMI upon departing the group and tried to secretly submit a trademark filing to the USPTO asserting sole rights to the mark. Lawfare challenged the filing leading to court proceedings.

After a two-week trial an eight-person jury unanimously dismissed ZMI's trademark infringement assertions and ruled that ZMI and Lawfare hold joint ownership of the Zioness mark. Oved and Oved then prevailed against all later requests from ZMI such as its motion for judgment as a matter of law its post-verdict renewal and its request for a retrial. When ZMI sought reargument the firm convinced the Court to reject that request too.

ZMI took the matter to the Second Circuit claiming it held sole trademark ownership by law but Oved and Oved persuaded the Second Circuit to affirm the jury decision and most District Court rulings. ZMI next sought Supreme Court review which the Oved firm also blocked successfully.

The only matter sent back by the Second Circuit concerned whether ZMI could obtain attorney fees for opposing Lawfare's copyright claim that was dropped voluntarily. In his June 2 2026 ruling Judge Hellerstein accepted Oved and Oved's arguments and denied ZMI's renewed request noting that ZMI is still not entitled to attorney fees since Lawfare's copyright claim was objectively reasonable and the record did not show improper intent in bringing the claim. Judge Hellerstein then ordered the clerk to close the case.

We are pleased that the District Court confirmed what was evident all along that the plaintiff's assertions lacked any merit and were rejected at each stage said Darren Oved Terrence A. Oved Aaron J. Solomon and Timothy Savitsky of Oved and Oved LLP. This result shows our firm's steady dedication to strongly protecting our clients and ensuring opposing sides are held responsible. Our client can now proceed with full vindication and focus on its important mission of protecting the Jewish community from growing antisemitism.

SOURCE Oved and Oved LLP