Category Archives: Northern District of Indiana

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Sweetwater Sound v. J2 Electronics Group

13 Tuesday Jul 2010

Posted by in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

Sweetwater Sound v. J2 Electronics Group

Both Plaintiff and Defendant are in the business of selling audio recording and reproduction equipment, musical instruments and accessories. Defendant allegedly is knowingly infringing Plaintiff’s registered trademark SWEETWATER.

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-00219-PPS-RBC
File Date: Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Plaintiff: Sweetwater Sound Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Larry L. Barnard, Robert T. Keen Jr. of Carson Boxberger LLP
Defendant: J2 Electronics Group Ltd.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, False Description
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Chief Judge Philip P. Simon
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Roger B. Cosbey

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – North American Van Lines files 3 suits in Northern District of Indiana

30 Wednesday Jun 2010

Posted by in Indiana, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

North American Van Lines (“NAVL”) apparently has a few trademark licensees who haven’t been making their license payments and yet refuse to stop using NAVL’s marks. 3 lawsuits have been filed recently in the Northern District by NAVL to enforce their rights (and collect some cash). For a copy of either complaint, please leave a comment.

North American Van Lines Inc. v. Firebird Moving & Storage Inc.

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-00199-JVB-RBC
File Date: Monday, June 21, 2010
Plaintiff: North American Van Lines Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David K. Hawk, Michael D. Hawk of Hawk Haynie Kammeyer & Chickedantz LLP
Defendant: Firebird Moving & Storage Inc.
Cause: Breach of Contract, Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin and Unfair Competition, Trademark Dilution, Unfair Competition
Court: Indiana Northern District Court
Judge: Judge Joseph S. Van Bokkelen
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Roger B. Cosbey

North American Van Lines Inc. v. Wayne Moving & Storage Co Inc

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-00200-JD-RBC
File Date: Friday, June 18, 2010
Plaintiff: North American Van Lines Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David K. Hawk, Michael D. Hawk of Hawk Haynie Kammeyer & Chickedantz LLP
Defendant: Wayne Moving & Storage Co Inc.
Cause: Breach of Contract, Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin and Unfair Competition, Trademark Dilution, Unfair Competition
Court: Indiana Northern District Court
Judge: Judge Jon E. DeGuilio
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Roger B. Cosbey

North American Van Lines Inc. v. C&D Moving & Storage Co.

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-00198-TLS-RBC
File Date: Friday, June 18, 2010
Plaintiff: North American Van Lines Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David K. Hawk, Michael D. Hawk of Hawk Haynie Kammeyer & Chickedantz LLP
Defendant: C & D Moving & Storage Co.
Cause: Breach of Contract, Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin and Unfair Competition, Trademark Dilution, Unfair Competition
Court: Indiana Northern District Court
Judge: Judge Theresa L. Springmann
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Roger B. Cosbey

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Coach Inc. v. Tom’s Treasure Chest

29 Tuesday Jun 2010

Posted by in Indiana, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Coach, Inc. et al v. Tom’s Treasure Chest

Coach makes handbags, wallets, etc. Defendant is accused of selling knockoffs from a retail store in Gary, Indiana. As you can see from the claims below, Coach has decided to throw the kitchen sink at Defendant.

Related case: Coach, Inc. et al v. Diggz Clothing LLC et al

Related case: Coach, Inc. et al v. TJ’s Handbags

Related case: Coach, Inc. et al v. Designer Fragrance & Gifts et al

Court Case Number: 2:10-cv-00243-PPS-PRC

File Date: Thursday, June 17, 2010

Plaintiff: Coach Inc., Coach Services Inc.

Plaintiff Counsel: Alejandro Valle of Gonzalez Saggio & Harlan LLP

Defendant: Tom’s Treasure Chest

Cause(s): Trademark Counterfeiting, Trademark Infringement, Trade Dress Infringement, False Designation of Origin and False Advertising, Trademark Dilution, Copyright Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Forgery under Ind. Code 35-43-5-2(b), Counterfeiting under Ind. Code 35-43-5-2(a)

Court: Indiana Northern District Court

Judge: Chief Judge Philip P. Simon

Referred To: Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry

Indiana Patent Litigation Update – Rosco Inc. v. Velvac Inc.

02 Wednesday Sep 2009

Posted by in Indiana, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Patent

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Court Case Number: 3:09-cv-00395-PPS-CAN

File Date: Friday, August 28, 2009

Plaintiff: Rosco Inc.

Plaintiff Counsel: David B. Bassett of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP

Defendant:Velvac Inc.

Cause: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

Court:Indiana Northern District Court

Judge: Judge Philip P. Simon

Referred To: Magistrate Judge Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Velvac logo

A patent infringement case involving two companies that make school bus mirrors.  Let the good times roll.

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Boss Products v. Port-A-Pit Bar-B-Que of Edgerton

11 Wednesday Feb 2009

Posted by in Indiana, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Boss Products, Inc. v. Port-A-Pit Bar-B-Que of Edgerton, Inc.
No: 3:05-CV-293 RM (February 4, 2009)
U.S. District Court, N.D. of Indiana
Before: Chief Judge Miller

For full opinion:
2009 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 8192

TRADEMARKS; LACHES

Opinion (Miller): Plaintiff Boss Products sued defendant Port-A-Pit Bar-B-Que of Edgerton, Ohio (Edgerton) for infringement of registered trademark (PORT-A-PIT) after Edgerton conducted business under PORT-A-PIT for 30 years.  Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that Boss Products inexcusably delayed enforcement of its trademark rights and therefore its recovery should be barred under laches or acquiescence.  The record indicated that Boss Products had knowledge of Edgerton’s use of the mark from the beginning and the 30 years of extreme delay would cause substantial prejudice if Edgerton was forced to rebuild its business under a new name.  Edgerton’s motion for summary judgment was granted.

KLF Legal: Note that the PORT-A-PIT registration (abstract below) was assigned to Boss Products back in December ’04.  Apparently, Boss continued to be unhappy about Edgerton’s use of the mark.  Edgerton relied on the doctrine of “laches,” an equitable defense.  This means that while Edgerton is legally infringing Boss’s trademark, it would be unfair to enforce the law against them.  The person invoking laches (Edgerton) is asserting that the opposing party (Boss) has “slept on its rights”, and that, as a result of this delay, that other party is no longer entitled to its original claim.  3 years might be too long to wait and try to enforce your trademark rights…30 years is definitely too long.

port-a-pit3

port-a-pit2

port-a-pit1

Courtesy of Willamette Law Online