Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – 7E Spa Licensing Group v. 7EFS of Wheatridge & 7EFS of Highlands Ranch

Here are two related cases (same Plaintiff) where licensing arrangements went bad:

7E Spa Licensing Group LLC et al v. Susan Dier et al

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-01111-RLY-TAB
File Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2015
Plaintiff: 7E Spa Licensing Group LLC, 7E Holdings 1 LLC, 7E LLC
Defendant: Susan Dier, 7EFS of Wheatridge LLC, Spectrum Medspa
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Indiana Crime Victims Act, Breach of Licensing Agreement, Breach of Operating Agreement, Breach of Equipment Lease, Tortious Interference, Breach of Fiduciary Duties
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker

7E Spa Licensing Group LLC et al v. 7EFS of Highlands Ranch LLC et al

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-01109-TWP-TAB
File Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2015
Plaintiff: 7E Spa Licensing Group LLC, 7E Holdings 1 LLC, 7E LLC
Defendant: 7EFS of Highlands Ranch LLC, Spectrum Medspa, Gordon Smith, Jane Smith
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Indiana Crime Victims Act, Breach of Licensing Agreement, Breach of Operating Agreement, Breach of Equipment Lease, Tortious Interference, Breach of Fiduciary Duties
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – HRHH Hotel/Casino v. Bella Vita

The Hardrock Hotel and Casino has been hosting a popular daytime party, The Rehab Pool Party, since 2004. Plaintiffs own multiple trademarks referring to daytime parties, and the Rehab name and logo. For the past few years, Bella Vita Lakeside restaurant and bar in Indianapolis has hosted weekly pool parties called “Rehab+ Sundays.” Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s party logo is confusingly similar to Plaintiffs’ owned trademarks. In fact, a local blog claimed “Bella Vita borrowed the “Rehab” theme from the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino.” Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have refused to cease their infringing use and intend to continue to organize and host the “Rehab+ Sundays” pool parties in the Summer of 2015.

HRHH Hotel/Casino LLC et al v. Bella Vita LLC et al

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-00791-WTL-MJD
File Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Plaintiff: HRHH Hotel/Casino LLC, HRHH IP, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Gregory F. Hahn, Craig E. Pinkus of Bose McKinney & Evans LLP
Defendant: Bella Vita LLC, Henri B. Najem
Cause: False Designation of Origin and Unfair Competition, Trademark Infringement, Dilution, Unfair Competition
CourtSouthern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge William T. Lawrence
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Agdia Inc. v. Jun Qiang Xia et al

Jun Q. Xia was employed by Agdia until 2001. After leaving the company, Xia allegedly violated the terms of a non-competition agreement. The ensuing lawsuit was resolved by a permanent injunction order in 2002. Later, Xia formed AC Diagnostics, which directly competes with Agdia. The AC Diagnostics website, acdiainc.com, is only one letter different than Agdia Inc and Xia allegedly covertly embedded the Agdia name into the website so that it was searchable without being visible.

Agdia Incorporated v. Jun Qiang Xia and AC Diagnostics, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00075
File Date: Monday, February 16, 2015
Plaintiff: Agdia Incorporated
Plaintiff Counsel: James M. Lewis, Michael J. Hays of Tuesley Hall Konopa LLP
Defendant: Jun Qiang Xia, AC Diagnostics, Inc.
Cause: Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin and False Advertising, CyberPiracy, Common Law Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Jon E. DeGuilio
Magistrate Judge: Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – NextEra Energy v. Nextra Technologies

Plaintiff is one of the largest electric power companies in North America and owns 167 trademark registrations including its “NextEra” mark. Defendant recently began to market, manufacture, import, distribute, license and/or sell energy products and services—including wind turbine components, solar panels, lithium batteries, and integrated new energy systems – under the name Nextra.

NextEra Energy Inc v. Nextra Technologies LLC

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-01941
File Date: Wednesday, October 08, 2014
Plaintiff: NextEra Energy Inc
Plaintiff Counsel: Matthew Farley of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Defendant: Nextera Technologies LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Chief Judge Philip P. Simon
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Complaint:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Edible Arrangements v. Edible Creations

This trademark lawsuit involves fresh fruit arrangements cut to look like flowers. Plaintiff operates under the EDIBLE ARRANGEMENTS mark while Defendants offer similar goods under the EDIBLE CREATIONS mark. Plaintiff has also opposed Defendants’ federal trademark application, which was refused when Defendant failed to respond to the opposition.

Edible Arrangements, LLC et al v. Thomas Drummond et al

Court Case Number: 1:14-cv-00315
File Date: Thursday, October 09, 2014
Plaintiff: Edible Arrangements, LLC, Edible Arrangements International, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Thomas A. Herr of Barrett & McNagny LLP
Defendant: Thomas Drummond, Edible Creations, LLC
Cause: Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Dilution, Copyright Infringement, Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Robert L. Miller, Jr.
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Roger B. Cosbey

Complaint:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – KM Innovations v. LTD Commodities

Another lawsuit involving synthetic fiber snowballs, this time for the INDOOR SNOWBALL FIGHT registered trademark.

Related case: KM Innovations v. Opportunities, Inc.

KM Innovations LLC v. LTD Commodities LLC

Court Case Number: 1:14-cv-01573-LJM-DML
File Date: Friday, September 26, 2014
Plaintiff: KM Innovations LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Dean E. McConnell of McConnell Intellectual Property Law
Defendant: LTD Commodities LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Larry J. McKinney
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Property Damage Appraisers v. John Mosley et al

Property Damage Appraisers Inc. v. John Mosley et al

Court Case Number: 1:14-cv-01490-RLY-MJD
File Date: Friday, September 12, 2014
Plaintiff: Property Damage Appraisers Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Derek R. Molter of Ice Miller LLP
Defendant: John Mosley, Clinton Body Shop Inc.
Cause: Federal Unfair Competition, State Unfair Competition, Defamation, Tortious Interference with Business Relationships
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Sensory Technologies v. LogMeIn

This trademark dispute involves Plaintiff’s JOIN® trademark and Defendant’s JOIN.ME® trademark. Both marks are registered with the USPTO and used in connection with virtual meeting/video conferencing services. The trademarks have been used concurrently since July 2010. 

Sensory Technologies LLC v. LogMeIn Inc.

Court Case Number: 1:14-cv-01406-SEB-DKL
File Date: Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Plaintiff: Sensory Technologies LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Jonathan G. Polak, Michael Z. Gordon of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
Defendant: Logmein Inc.
Cause: Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Forgery, Declaratory Judgment of Trademark Invalidity, Permanent Injunctive Relief
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Sarah Evans Barker
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Denise K. LaRue

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Chanel v. Chanel’s Salon

From the Complaint: “Chanel recognizes the fact that “Chanel” is the first name of Defendant Chanel Jones. But this suit is not about Ms. Jones’ ability to use her name to identify herself. Ms. Jones is using CHANEL as a trade name for a beauty business and commercially exploiting the name CHANEL. There is no absolute right to exploit one’s given name commercially if such use is inconsistent with Chanel’s rights. In this case, Ms. Jones is not using her entire name but is instead only using that part of her name that copies Chanel’s famous CHANEL trademark. Ms. Jones’ use began long after the CHANEL mark was registered and became famous, and Ms. Jones’ use is in connection with services related to those offered by Chanel.”

Chanel, Inc. v. Chanel’s Salon LLC et al

Court Case Number: 2:14-cv-00304
File Date: Friday, August 29, 2014
Plaintiff: Chanel, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Gregory A Neibarger
Defendant: Chanel’s Salon LLC, Chanel Jones
Cause: Federal Trademark Dilution, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, State Unfair Competition, State Trademark Infringement
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Theresa L. Springmann
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry

Complaint: