The Belagavi Commercial Court on Monday (February 16) issued a fresh summons to representatives of US artificial intelligence (AI) company Anthropic PBC in a trademark case filed by the Karnataka-based company over the mark ‘ANTHROPIC’, according to a Bar and Bench report.
Principal District and Sessions Judge Manjunath Nayak had earlier summoned the company, but its representatives failed to appear before the court on February 16 as directed.
The latest summons was directed to be issued to officers of the company at its newly opened branch in Bengaluru.
The case was filed by Belagavi-based Anthropic Softwares Private Limited, which alleged trademark infringement by the US company.
What is it about?
Anthropic Softwares Private Limited has sought a temporary injunction to prevent the US company from directly or indirectly claiming association with it by using the “Anthropic” mark or any similar or confusingly similar marks, the report said.
The company claimed to be using the name “Anthropic” since 2017 and has built a considerable reputation in the Indian subcontinent over the years. It said the US company’s name is prominently suggested instead of its own on artificial intelligence-based platforms and Google’s standard search.
“As a result, the plaintiff’s name has been completely removed or relocated from search suggestions and related results. This has led to confusion among users, customers and stakeholders who are being misled to believe that (the US company) is affiliated with or has replaced (the Indian company),” the company quoted the report as saying.
The Indian company based its information on a newspaper report that claimed the US entity was opening its first office in India, as well as a website announcement that indicated it would start operations in Bengaluru in early 2026.
Earlier court decisions
On January 17, 2026, the court entered an order allowing the action to be filed without requiring mandatory pre-institutional mediation because an urgent preliminary injunction was sought.
According to the report, the court declined to issue an ex parte injunction, saying that apart from two publications, there was no evidence that the US company had started operations in India under the registered trademark of the Karnataka-based company. The court also noted that the defendant’s address in the cause of action was listed as San Francisco, indicating that no Indian facility had yet been established. The court found that there was no imminent risk of infringement.
The court issued a notice of preliminary motion and subpoena to the US company. No representatives of the company showed up for the meeting on Monday, which led to the issuance of a new summons. He found that the American company had set up an office in Bengaluru and ordered that the summons be sent to that Bengaluru address.