14095863 Canada Inc v Moosehead Breweries Limited
Trademarks Opposition Board · Jul 3, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Trademarks Opposition Board
- Record ID
- 14095863-canada-inc-v-moosehead-breweries-limited-2026-07-03
- Observed outcome
- The Registrar maintained the Owner's trademark registrations where evidence of use was sufficient, deleted goods where evidence was absent, and declined to award costs against the Requesting Party due to procedural non-compliance.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Trademarks Opposition Board found that the Requesting Party submitted fabricated case law, non-existent exhibits, and misrepresented evidence. The Registrar concluded this conduct was unreasonable and potentially deceptive, noting a failure to verify materials if AI was used. However, the Registrar declined to award costs because the Owner failed to submit the request within the regulatory timeframe.
The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Submissions referred to non-existent exhibits and mischaracterized the Owner's evidence (paras 25–30 and others)..
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a international proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Case Law
- Fabricated Quotations
- Misrepresented Evidence
- Reference To Non Existent Exhibits
- Failure To Verify AI Generated Content
- Pro Se
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- Generative artificial intelligence (AI)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Section 45 summary expungement proceedings before the Trademarks Opposition Board.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
Registrar explicitly mentions generative artificial intelligence as a potential source of the errors.
Limited to the linked source and the documented citation or quotation issue and stated disposition; no unrecorded tool, motive, or broader litigation facts are inferred.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Check the cited authority, reporter reference, and pinpoint against the primary source before filing.
- Correct any unsupported citation promptly and preserve the verification record.
- Treat the listed consequence as case-specific rather than as a general rule about AI use.