Indiana, IBM fight over $9M in equipment

Tags

,

IBM has sent a letter to Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller, demanding the return of more than $9 million in computers, printers, telephones and other equipment.

IBM and the state have sued each other over the the cancellation of a contract for the modernization of the state’s welfare delivery system.

Gov. Mitch Daniels canceled the state’s $1.37 billion contract last year following months of problems and complaints about the automated intake system.

IBM is not disputing the state’s right to cancel the contract, but is arguing in court that the state should pay for the equipment.

See Indy.com for the full story.

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Brian Andr’e Warren v. Xlibris Corporation

Tags

,

Brian Andr’e Warren v. Xlibris Corporation

A prisoner sought to proceed pro se in a copyright action but couldn’t pay his filing fees. The prisoner attempted to proceed in forma pauperis, but was denied by the Court.  Apparently, the plaintiff had brought over three bad lawsuits in the past and thus lost his entitlement to proceed in forma pauperis. This action was filed on July 6 and closed on July 16 without prejudice.

In forma pauperis” refers to a motion filed by a low-income person in order to proceed in court without having to pay court costs, usually filing fees. It doesn’t usually cover other costs, such as those involved in discovery (depositions, witness fees, court reporters, etc.) and service of process.

Here’s the language of the Court’s Order on Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis:

The plaintiff’s complaint in this action is accompanied by his request to proceed in forma pauperis. The plaintiff has acquired three or more “strikes” through having litigation to which he was a party in a federal court dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted or as frivolous. Therefore, he is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis, unless the exception under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), that he “is under imminent danger of serious physical injury,” applies. Those circumstances are not presented by this complaint based on copyright infringement.

The circumstances of this case trigger the rule of Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 859 (7th Cir. 1999), which states:

An effort to bamboozle the court by seeking permission to proceed in forma pauperis after a federal judge has held that §1915(g) applies to a particular litigant will lead to immediate termination of the suit.

Accordingly, the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied and this action is dismissed without prejudice.

For a full copy of the Complaint or Order, please leave a comment.

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-00885-WTL -TAB
File Date: Tuesday, July 06, 2010
Plaintiff: Brian Andr’e Warren
Plaintiff Counsel: Brian Andr’e Warren – Pro Se
Defendant: Xlibris Corporation
Cause: Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge William T. Lawrence
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Brandt Industries v. Pitonyak Machinery Corporation

Tags

, , , ,

Brandt Industries v. Pitonyak Machinery Corporation

This is a declaratory judgment action by Plaintiff for the unregistered BRANDT mark. Both parties have used the mark for many decades in different locations. Plaintiff is a Canadian company operating in the U.S. Leave a comment for a full copy of the complaint.

Court Case Number: 1:10-cv-00857-TWP -DML
File Date: Tuesday, July 06, 2010
Plaintiff: Brandt Industries Ltd.
Plaintiff Counsel: Carrie A. Shufflebarger of Thompson Hine LLP
Defendant Counsel: Aaron M. Staser, Paul B. Hunt
Defendant: Pitonyak Machinery Corporation
Cause: Declaration of Non-Infringement, Declaration of Priority, Declaration of Estoppel by Laches, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch

Indiana Innovation Showcase Set for 2-7 PM at the Purdue Technology Center

Indianapolis, Indiana — Entrepreneurs representing 40 new and expanding Indiana businesses presented technologies and economic opportunities before investors and business leaders at the inaugural Indiana Innovation Showcase.

Event will be held from 2-7 p.m. in the Purdue Technology Center located in the Purdue Research Park at AmeriPlex-Indianapolis near the Indianapolis International Airport.

Participating in the invitation-only program are more than 250 entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, angel investors and economic development leaders. Program is sponsored by the Indiana Venture Club, Purdue Research Foundation and the Indiana Economic Development Corp. (IEDC).

Speakers for the program include Gary Anderson, senior advisor for TL Ventures and keynote speaker for the program; Joseph B. Hornett, senior vice president, treasurer and COO, Purdue Research Foundation; Steve Hourigan, director for the 21st Century Fund and entrepreneurship, IEDC; Faraz Abassi, president, Venture Club of Indiana; John Hanak, statewide director, Purdue Technology Centers, Purdue Research Foundation; and Bruce Kidd, senior vice president, Walker Information Inc.

Entrepreneurs who participated in the showcase have already raised more than $100 million in funding for their firms. Participating companies included: Kylin Therapeutics Inc., West Lafayette; CMT: Comfort Motion Technologies, Anderson; First Precision LLC, Merrillville; Ikotech LLC, New Albany; Indiana Nanotech LLC, Indianapolis; Wolf Technical Services Inc., Indianapolis; OrthoPediatrics Corp., Warsaw; and Vontoo Inc., Indianapolis. A full list of participating companies can be found here.

Source: Source: Inside INdiana Business

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Jane Ruemmele v. Fundex

An Indianapolis lawyer who created the game “Chronology” is accusing Fundex Games Ltd. of trademark infringement.

Jane Ruemmele, a Marion County public defender, filed suit March 24 in U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana. The lawsuit alleges breach of contract, trademark infringement, use of a counterfeit mark, unfair competition, copyright infringement, trademark dilution and forgery.

Ruemmele is seeking damages, plus a judgment for the return or destruction of all products bearing the Chronology trademark.

Fundex is a family-owned company based in Plainfield that sells licensed games, plus standard games such as checkers and chess. Ruemmele holds the trademark and copyright to the game Chronology, which she first licensed in 1995.

Fundex acquired the licensing rights to “Chronology” in October of 2007 with the purchase of Great American Puzzle Factory, according to the lawsuit. The deal that Ruemmele struck with Great American in 1995 provides her royalty payments of 6 percent of net sales. The rate rises to 8 percent after the first 100,000 games are sold.

“Fundex has sold numerous units of the card game since its acquisition of Great American,” the lawsuit alleges, but the company has provided no royalty statements or payments since October 2008.

Ruemmele also believes the payments Fundex made up to that point were less than required under the license agreement.

The lawsuit says Ruemmele attempted to work with Fundex to extend the license agreement past an expiration date of March 31, 2008, or to strike a new deal. “However, Fundex continually refused to return calls or correspondence from Ruemmele or her attorney while Fundex continued to sell and market the card game.”

Jonathan Polak, the Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP attorney representing Ruemmele, said his client isn’t sure exactly how many copies of Chronology have been sold by Fundex—that’s why she’s seeking an audit. The contract with Great American gave Ruemmele the right to inspect company sales records.

Polak wouldn’t say how much “Chronology” had earned before Fundex acquired the game.

Ruemmele’s relationship with Great American, formerly based in Connecticut, suggests the game was successful.

Ruemmele and Great American renewed the contract in 2000 and again on Oct. 15, 2007, shortly before the sale to Fundex.

Great American also paid Ruemmele an annual, guaranteed advance of $1,000, according to the license contract.

Source: Indianapolis Business Journal