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,, 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


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


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


Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Rieke Corporation v. Riekes Packaging Corporation

Since as least as early as June 2000, Plaintiff, based in Auburn, Indiana, has continuously used the RIEKE PACKAGING SYSTEMS® trademark in connection with Plaintiff’s dispensing systems and closures. Around 2012, Defendant began using the RIEKES PACKAGING CORPORATION name in connection with glass bottles, plastic bottles, plastic closures, caps, metalclosures, dispensing closures and systems. Plaintiff has brought this lawsuit seeking damages and injunctive relief.

Rieke Corporation v. Riekes Packaging Corporation

Court Case Number: 1:14-cv-00241-PPS-RBC
File Date: Thursday, August 07, 2014
Plaintiff: Rieke Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: Kurt N. Jones of Woodard Emhardt Moriarty McNett & Henry LLP
Defendant: Riekes Packaging Corporation
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, 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 Roger B. Cosbey

Indiana University selected to participate in USPTO’s Law School Clinic Certification Pilot Program

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today announced the selection of 19 law schools that will join the USPTO’s Law School Clinic Certification Pilot Program this fall. Indiana University School of Law was one of five law schools selected to join both the Patent and Trademark portions of the Program.

The participating law school clinical programs provide patent and trademark legal services to independent inventors and small businesses on a pro bono basis. Clinic clients can expect to receive searches and opinions, advice from clinic law students regarding their intellectual property (IP) needs under the supervision of a faculty practitioner, drafting and filing of applications, and representation before the USPTO.

The law school clinical programs possess solid Intellectual Property curricula supporting a participating student’s hands-on learning in the Program; a commitment to networking in the community; comprehensive pro bono services; and excellent case management systems. Students in the patent and/or trademark portions of the Program can expect to draft and file applications and respond to Office Actions.

Click here for the full USPTO announcement and a list of all schools selected to participate in the Certification Pilot Program.

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Liquid Palace v. E Liquid Palace

This is a dispute between two electronic cigarette distributors over the marks “Genie,” Liquid Genie” and “Electric Genie.” Both parties began using their respective trademarks in 2013 and have retail locations approximately six miles apart. This case was removed from the Circuit Court for Floyd County, Indiana.

Liquid Palace, LLC et al v. E Liquid Palace, LLC et al

Court Case Number: 4:14-cv-00051-TWP-WGH
File Date: Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Plaintiff: Liquid Palace, LLC, Robert W. Kaiser, Jr.
Plaintiff Counsel: H. Kevin Eddins, Kevin J. Fiet
Defendant: E Liquid Palace, Austin Simon, Russell Simon
Defendant Counsel: Loren T. Prizant, Robert John Theuerkauf
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Intentional Interference with Prospective Business Advantage, Intentional Interference with Business Relationships, Unfair Competition, Injunctive Relief
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann, Jr.