NEW YORK, June 4, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — Oved & Oved LLP has secured a decisive victory on behalf of its client, The Lawfare Project, Inc., a non-profit organization, after Southern District Court Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein reaffirmed that opposing party Zioness Movement, Inc. (“ZMI”) is not entitled to attorney’s fees in connection with Lawfare’s copyright claim.

The case, Zioness Movement, Inc. v. The Lawfare Project, Inc., 21-cv-7429 (AKH), arose from a dispute over ownership of the “Zioness” trademark, which Lawfare paid to create, develop, and promote. The dispute began when Lawfare’s former employee, Amanda Berman, formed ZMI after leaving the organization and attempted to surreptitiously file a trademark application with the USPTO claiming exclusive ownership of the mark. Lawfare opposed the application, and litigation ensued.

Following a two-week trial, an eight-juror panel unanimously rejected ZMI’s trademark infringement claims and declared that ZMI and Lawfare share equal ownership of the Zioness mark. Oved & Oved then successfully defeated every subsequent motion made by ZMI including ZMI’s motion for judgment as a matter of law, its renewed post-verdict motion, and its motion for a new trial. When ZMI moved to reargue, the firm successfully persuaded the Court to deny that motion as well.

ZMI appealed to the Second Circuit, arguing it was the exclusive owner of the trademark as a matter of law, but lost when Oved & Oved convinced the Second Circuit to uphold the jury’s verdict and the District Court’s decisions in nearly all respects. ZMI then petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari, which the Oved firm successfully defeated as well.

The sole issue remanded by the Second Circuit was whether ZMI was entitled to attorney’s fees for defending against Lawfare’s voluntarily dismissed copyright claim. In his decision issued June 2, 2026, Judge Hellerstein agreed with Oved & Oved’s position and denied ZMI’s renewed motion, writing that “ZMI remains unentitled to attorney’s fees” because Lawfare’s copyright claim was “objectively reasonable” and “the record [did] not reflect an improper motivation for asserting the claim.” Judge Hellerstein then directed the clerk to “mark the case as closed.”

“We are gratified that the District Court reaffirmed what was clear throughout—that plaintiff’s claims were entirely without merit and failed at every turn,” said Darren Oved, Terrence A. Oved, Aaron J. Solomon, and Timothy Savitsky of Oved & Oved LLP. “This outcome reflects our firm’s unwavering commitment to vigorously defending our clients and holding opposing parties accountable. Our client can now move forward with the satisfaction of complete vindication and devote its energy to the vital work of defending the Jewish people against rising antisemitism.”

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/oved–oved-llp-victorious-for-the-lawfare-project-court-denies-attorneys-fees-closing-door-on-years-of-litigation-302792090.html

SOURCE Oved & Oved LLP