Weekly Wrap: FN Sues Ruger, 2A Groups Take Assault Weapons Ban to SCOTUS

Welcome to a weekly series here on Pew Pew Tactical dedicated to the gun news you need to know.

So, keep reading for this week’s notable news headlines…

FN Sues Ruger for Trademark Infringement

FN launched a lawsuit against Ruger this week, accusing the Connecticut firearms manufacturer of trademark infringement and unfair competition.

The case, filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, centers on Ruger's use of the “SFAR” trademark, which FN claims infringes upon its well-established “SCAR” model name.

FN claims that Ruger's SFAR-marked firearms directly compete with FN's SCAR-branded firearms. The company says this moniker leads to potential confusion among consumers buying guns.

Ruger's alleged infringement, according to court documents, involves the marketing and selling of firearms under the "SFAR" mark, which FN contends is confusingly similar to its own SCAR mark.

The complaint outlines how Ruger’s use of SFAR in commerce, particularly in the firearms sector where FN's SCAR has established “significant goodwill,” is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception among consumers.

“FN understands that Ruger markets its Infringing SFAR Mark in connection with the same firearms as FN that are very similar or nearly identical in size, purpose, weight, feel, color, caliber, capacity, features, and even style to the firearms marketed and sold by FN for nearly fifteen (15) years under the SCAR Mark,” the complaint says.

“Specifically, Ruger is selling firearms, including rifles chambered for the .308 Winchester and 7.62 x 51mm cartridges, using the Infringing SFAR Mark in a manner that is highly likely to cause confusion with FN’s SCAR Mark.”

Though neither company has commented on the lawsuit, typical for this kind of case, FN is seeking injunctive relief that would prevent Ruger from using SFAR, destruction of “infringing materials,” and all profits made from the SFAR – in addition to damages associated with the alleged harm to FN’s business and reputation.

FN also requests a trial by jury to determine the fate of the SFAR.

2A Groups Turn to High Court to Overturn IL Assault Weapons Ban

Gun Owners of America and the Gun Owners Foundation teamed up to petition the Supreme Court to overturn an appellate court ruling in Illinois that bans assault weapons statewide.

The 2A advocacy groups asked the High Court to review the decision that allowed the Protect Illinois Communities Act to go into effect, which bans assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The measure was passed last year after the Highland Park shooting that left seven dead.

The bill was met with immediate disapproval from gun rights groups, who filed a lawsuit challenging the measure. However, in November, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to “military-grade” weapons.

In the 49-page petition to SCOTUS, the groups argue that the appellate court’s decision to upload the Protect Illinois Communities Act goes against a previous Supreme Court ruling that prohibits states from restricting access to guns in “common use.” Further, they state the Seventh Court’s decision is an affront to the historical tradition of the Second Amendment.

“Founding-era history clearly establishes a tradition contrary to the majority’s premise. Indeed, the Founders repeatedly sought to ensure the citizenry would be as well-equipped as the military,” the petition states.

“By excising and casting aside the prefatory Militia Clause from the rest of the Second Amendment – finding no relation between the clauses at all – the panel rejected the very historical practices that govern resolution of this case.”

It’s worth noting that Supreme Court justices have previously declined to hear the gun ban challenge, refusing to intervene in December before the law went into effect.

Under the new law, gun owners must register banned guns with the Illinois police. As of January, the deadline for registration, less than 1.5% of licensed gun owners had done so.

CT Lawmakers Want to Expand Gun-Free Zones to Election Sites

Ahead of what some are suggesting might be a tense Presidential race, Connecticut lawmakers are considering a bill that would squash residents’ ability to carry guns and other weapons near polling locations come November.

Packaged as part of a bevy of bills introduced to “protect voters and election workers,” H.B. 5448 would prohibit firearms in polling places, early voting locations, same-day election registration sites, ballot counting and recanvassing sites, and all ballot drop boxes. The measure would also prevent election workers’ home addresses from being disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act.

State Representative Matt Blumenthal (D-Stamford) said the measures were necessary to ensure election workers remained safe.

“Threats against elections workers and elections officials have spiraled out of control,” Blumenthal told Connecticut Public Radio.

“In the last four years since the 2020 election, election workers have faced a constant stream of death threats, often quite graphic. They have been doxed.”

Those opposing the bill say that the measure would only prevent law-abiding gun owners from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

“I do take issue with the bill and the assertion that folks are somehow not worthy of their constitutional protections because they’re near a polling location or even inside of one,” Senator Rob Sampson (R-Wolcott) told Connecticut Public Radio.

“The way I look at it is, somebody who is a bad actor intent on harming, they’re not going to care about the law one iota.”

The bill underwent a public hearing on March 8 after being referred to the Joint Committee on Government Administration and Elections.

Sources

• FN Complaint
• GOA Petition
• WBEZ
• H.B. 5448
• Connecticut Public Radio