Category Archives: Southern District of Indiana

Indiana Copyright Litigation Update – Stephane Dion v. Allwin Powersports Corp.

08 Tuesday Feb 2011

Posted by in Copyright, Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Southern District of Indiana

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Stephane Dion et al v. Allwin Powersports Corporation, Inc. et al

Conventions don’t just bring tourists. They bring lawsuits too!

Dion, a Canadian motorcycle helmet designer, is suing an Illinois corporation whose principal is a Chinese national…in the Southern District of Indiana. What brings this illustrious crowd to our fair Hoosier Halls of Justice? It’s all because of the upcoming Dealer Expo 11.

Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (see below) to stop Defendant from selling allegedly infringing motorcycle helmets at the upcoming Powersports tradeshow from Feb. 18-20 in Indianapolis.

The two parties had previously operated under a royalty agreement but Defendant apparently stopped making payments in 2010.

There should be some fairly quick updates in this case so check back soon.

Court Case Number: 1:11-cv-00173-RLY-TAB
File Date: Friday, February 04, 2011
Plaintiff: Stephane Dion, 91934885 Quebec Inc. dba Dion Designs
Plaintiff Counsel: Joseph Peter Rompala, Todd Arthur Richardson of Lewis & Kappes
Defendant: Allwin Powersports Corporation, Inc.
Arthur Liao
MHR Helmet Co. Ltd.
Foshan Shunde Fengxing Helmets Ltd.
Jiangmen Pengcheng Helmets Ltd.
Cause: Violation of Lanham Act, Copyright Infringement, Misappropriation of Trade Secrets, Breach of Contract, Conversion, Unfair Competition, Declaratory Relief
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker

COMPLAINT:

MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION:

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Noble Roman’s Inc. v. Brabham Oil Company

06 Sunday Feb 2011

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Noble Roman’s Inc. v. Brabham Oil Company et al

Noble Roman’s has filed yet another trademark lawsuit (the 18th since 2007) to enforce the terms of an expired franchise agreement. The Indiana-based pizza chain alleges that the South Carolina-based gas station chain formerly operated seven Noble Roman’s franchise locations and continued to use Noble Roman’s trade dress after the franchise agreements terminated.

Court Case Number: 1:11-cv-00135-SEB-DML
File Date: Thursday, January 27, 2011
Plaintiff: Noble Roman’s Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Marisol Sanchez of Bose McKinney & Evans, LLP
Defendant: Brabham Oil Company, Brabham Oil Company dba E-Z SHOP
Cause: Lanham Act Trade Dress Infringement, Common Law Trade Dress Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Breach of Contract
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Sarah Evans Barker
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch

Indiana Right of Publicity Litigation Update – Patricia Day v. Wonderama Toys et al

28 Tuesday Dec 2010

Posted by in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Right of Publicity, Southern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Patricia Day v. Wonderama Toys et al

Plaintiff Patricia Day is the lead singer of the Danish rockabilly band HorrorPops. Plaintiff claims a distinctive on-stage appearance, which combines:

(1) black hair meticulously done in 50’s pin-up fashion; (2) her retro hairstyle juxtaposed against conspicuous and heavily-applied black eye shadow and liner and deep red lipstick; (3) her form fitting ’50s-style pencil skirts that go just past the knees; (4) her full-color “sleeve tattoos” on both upper arms; and, most importantly (5) her distinctive instrumental extension of her personality: her giant tattooed upright bass.

Mattel allegedly created a Barbie doll using the likeness of Ms. Day without obtaining a license. In addition to being an unauthorized use of her likeness, the Barbie doll has caused Ms. Day particular anguish due to her feminist leanings and the confusion caused among peers and fans.

Why was this case filed in Indiana? Presumably to take advantage of Indiana’s right of publicity law, perhaps the most extensive right of publicity statute in the world, providing recognition of the right for 100 years after death, and protecting not only the usual “name, image and likeness,” but also signature, photograph, gestures, distinctive appearances, and mannerisms. Defendants Wonderama and Rainbow End are small Indiana toy stores (in Anderson and Daleville, respectively) that sold the allegedly infringing doll. Of course, the real targets of this lawsuit are Mattel (a Delaware corporation) and Hard Rock Cafe (a Florida corporation).

Did Mattel usurp Ms. Day’s likeness for the doll? You be the judge:

This should be an interesting case to follow step-by-step. Plaintiff has retained a few high-profile entertainment attorneys and we can expect Mattel and Hard Rock will do the same. I’ll keep you updated with each new filing. In the meantime, more images of Ms. Day for comparison sake:

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-01689-RLY-MJD
File Date: Thursday, December 23, 2010
Plaintiff: Patricia Day
Plaintiff Counsel: John Tehranian and Peter Afrasiabi of ONE LLP
Defendants: Wonderama Toys, Rainbow’s End Collectibles, Mattel Corp., Hard Rock Cafe International (USA), Inc.
Cause: Infringement of Right of Publicity (Indiana Code 32-36), False Association and False Endorsement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore

Southern District of Indiana swears in new Magistrate

18 Saturday Dec 2010

Posted by in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Southern District of Indiana

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana announced that Mark J. Dinsmore took the oath to become a United States Magistrate Judge on December 17, 2010. Chief Judge Richard L. Young administered the oath in his courtroom in the Birch Bayh Federal Building and United States Courthouse in Indianapolis. A formal investiture ceremony will be held at a later date. The position Judge Dinsmore fills became available due to the elevation of Jane E. Magnus-Stinson to an Article III judgeship, effective June 9, 2010.

Magistrate judges preside over many pretrial proceedings in both civil and criminal cases in federal court, including intellectual property cases. A critical part of the job is conducting mediation and settlement proceedings in civil cases, helping parties settle their disputes by agreement. United States Magistrate Judges are appointed by the Judges of the U.S. District Court for a term of eight years, and are eligible for reappointment to successive terms.

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Traveler’s Joy v. Haycco

12 Sunday Dec 2010

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Traveler’s Joy Inc. v. Haycco, LLC

Straightforward trademark dispute with a hint of intentional imitation. Plaintiff has used the TRAVELER’S JOY trademark in connection with gift registry services since 2005. Defendant operates a honeymoon registry service at joyhoneymoon.com.  The Complaint doesn’t specify how long Defendant has been using the JOYHONEYMOON mark but the copyright notice on their website is 2009.

TRAVELER’S JOY v. JOY HONEYMOON…confusingly similar?

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-01574-TWP-TAB
File Date: Tuesday, December 07, 2010
Plaintiff: Traveler’s Joy Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Robert L. Barlow, III of Bahret & Associates
Defendant: Haycco, LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Dilution of Famous Mark
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker