April 2023 Indiana Intellectual Property Litigation Update

18 Tuesday Apr 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Spring is here! Only two new lawsuits were filed since last month but there were many developments in pending Indiana intellectual property litigation. Several fully-briefed motions have receiving a court ruling, including one defendant successfully winning a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. One lawsuit saw an unusual request to file a “surreply,” which was immediately challenged by the opposing party. BMI received a summary judgment of $28,000 over 4 songs played on a roadhouse jukebox. We don’t know why the roadhouse chose not to defend itself, or attempt settlement as is customary, but surely it would have paid far less for the standard BMI license.

Here are some of the more interesting trademark and copyright litigation filings from the last month:

Sears Authorized Hometown Stores, LLC v. Lynn Retail, Inc. et al. (SD, filed 6/4/2021) – The settlement deadline has been extended by motion to April 26, 2023.

Noble Roman’s, Inc. v. AMI Stores Management, Inc. et al. (SD, filed 6/6/2021) –  No update this month.

Forest River, Inc. v. inTech Trailers, Inc. (ND, filed 8/31/2021) – On March 30, 2023, Forest River filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgement for its trademark infringement and unfair competition claims.

The Motion for Partial Summary Judgment was accompanied by a Motion to Seal Documents, to which inTech filed a Response on April 13, 2023, expressly reserving opposition to inclusion of portions of an Asset Purchase Agreement among the sealed documents.

Thomas v. ooShirts, Inc. et al. (SD, filed 9/24/2021) – A telephonic status conference was held on April 5, 2023 to discuss discovery status and another is scheduled for May 5, 2023.

Edutainment Live, LLC v. Video Game Palooza et al. (SD, filed 10/11/2021) –On April 17, 2023, the Court entered an order granting a permanent injunction against the defendants and dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice.

Gabet et al. v. Amazon.com. Inc. et al. (ND, filed 1/20/2022) – The parties have a status conference scheduled for May 5, 2023.  

The Evolutionary Level Above Human, Inc. v. Havel et al (ND, filed 5/18/2022) – There were a number of motions and responses filed over the last month, including the Plaintiff’s response to one of the individual defendants’ request to file a “Surreply.”

Broadcast Music, Inc. et al v. Thirty-Six Saloon, LLC d/b/a Thirty Six Saloon et al. (SD, filed 7/27/2022) – On April 13, 2023, a Default Judgment was entered against the Defendants for $28,378. This amount is likely significantly higher than the Rockville, Indiana roadhouse would have paid for a standard BMI jukebox license, but the roadhouse apparently opted to take no action in the lawsuit.

Schwartz v. Kilroy’s North America, LLC et al (SD, filed 8/5/2022) – On April 13, 2023, a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal was filed.

Oakley, Inc. v. Batter’s Box Training, LLC et al (SD, filed 8/11/2022) – No update this month.

Honest Abe Roofing franchise, Inc. v. DCH & Associates, LLC et al. (SD, filed 9/7/2022) –  No update this month.

Phoenix USA RV, Inc. v. Hoosier Custom Cruisers LLC et al. (ND, removed 10/7/2022) – No update this month. 

MaddenCo Inc. v. Reed et al. (SD, filed 10/31/2022) – On April 13, 2023, the Court granted Defendant HG Autotech’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction.

The Center for Gestalt Development, Inc. v. Bowman (SD (11/09/2022) – The Court approved a Case Management Plan on April 4, 2023. Discovery is due by August 7, 2023 and dispositive motions are due by October 2, 2023.

1.4G Holdings, LLC v. North Central Industries, Inc. et al. (SD 1/05/2023) – Defendant Brown’s Motion to Dismiss is now fully-briefed as of March 21, 2023. A pretrial conference was held on April 13, 2023. Discovery is due by November 3, 2023 and dispositive motions are due by January 5, 2024.

Stross v. Lynn Boolman Auto Sales Limited Liability Company et al. (ND 1/25/2023) –  Defendant Lynn Boolman Auto Sales filed its Answer on March 28, 2023. The response deadline for Defendant Carsforsale.com has been extended to April 20, 2023.

Albert’s Diamond Jewelers, Inc. v. AaLand Diamond Jewelers LLC (ND 2/01/2023) – Defendant AaLand filed its Answer on March 15, 2023. A telephonic conference was held on April 6, 2023.

Delta Faucet Company v. Watkins et al. (SD 2/01/2023) – On March 27, 2023, the Court denied (without prejudice) Delta Faucet Company’s Motion for Alternative Service of Process. Delta’s counsel will need to try a new strategy to serve the Complaint on the hard-to-find Defendant.

USA Football, Inc. v. Flag Football World Championship Tour, LLC et al. (SD 2/13/2023) – No update this month.

Freedom Mortgage Corporation v. Freedompoint, LLC (SD 2/14/2023) – The Defendant’s response deadline has been extended to May 8, 2023.

Roller Ready, LLC v. LA Systems, LLC d/b/a Monkey Rung et al. (ND 2/14/2023) – No update yet.

Taylor Shaye Designs LLC v. Shein Distribution Corp. (SD 4/11/2023) – No update yet.

HealthSmart Foods, Inc. v. Sweet Nothings, Inc. et al. (SD 4/13/2023) – No update yet.

March 2023 Updates – February 2023 Updates – January 2023 Updates

December 2022 Updates –  December 2021 Updates

Trademark Owner Successfully Overcomes USPTO 2(d) Refusal but Still Gets Sued

17 Monday Apr 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

This lawsuit highlights an awkward but common situation where a senior trademark owner and the USPTO disagree on whether a likelihood of confusion exists between two trademarks. If a junior user’s trademark is allowed to be registered by the USPTO, sometimes a senior user has no option but to bring a federal lawsuit and/or a TTAB cancellation proceeding.

HealthSmart Foods, an Evansville, Indiana-based producer of health food snacks (e.g. snack bars, snack bites, shakes, and candies) has filed a trademark lawsuit against Sweet Nothings, a small California company selling healthy family snacks like packaged smoothies and “nut butter bites.”

HealthSmart Foods sells a line of snack clusters, crisps and patties called SWEET NOTHINGS.

Sweet Nothings has obtained a trademark registration for its SWEET NOTHINGS trademark after successfully overcoming a 2(d) likelihood of confusion refusal citing the HealthSmart Foods’ trademark registration. The 2(d) refusal was seemingly overcome with evidence that the “SWEET NOTHINGS” trademark is very highly suggestive of the type of goods and therefore entitled to a very narrow scope of protection. Specifically, the evidence consisted of fourteen examples of entities in HealthSmart’s industry who use the marks “SWEET NOTHINGS” or “SWEET NOTHING” as a source indicator in connection with goods and services legally identical to HealthSmart’s goods:

  • Sweet Nothing Desserts, LLC – Located in Georgia, they bake cakes and cookies to order
  • Sweet Nothing Fine Cakes and Desserts – Located in Wisconsin, they bake high quality
  • cakes
  • Sweet Nothings Cake Shop – Located in Southern California, they offer a variety of
  • baked goods
  • Sweet Nothings Cakes – Located in Wisconsin, they bake cakes for special occasions
  • Sweet Nothings – Located in Ohio, they offer a variety of snacks
  • Sweet Nothings Cookies – Located in Arkansas, they offer custom cookies
  • Sweet Nothings Custom Cookies – Located in North Carolina, they offer custom cookies
  • Luv Ice Cream – Located in Minnesota, they offer “Sweet Nothings” branded fruit and
  • candy
  • Sweet Nothings – Located in New Jersey, they offer a variety of chocolates and candy
  • Sweet Nothings Snacks – Located in Utah, they offer a variety of snacks
  • Sweet Nothings – a brand of nougat cluster candy offered by Healthsmart, located in Indiana
  • Krissy’s Sweet Nothings – an online business that offers cakes
  • Sweet Nothings & Pastries – Located in Texas, they offer a variety of cupcakes and cakes
  • Sweet Nothings Cakes and Confections – Located in Missouri, they offer a variety of
  • cupcakes, cakes, pastries, and pies

HealthSmart Foods clearly does not agree with the USPTO’s decision to register Sweet Nothings’ trademark and now seeks the intervention of the Southern District of Indiana. I’d expect a similar “very highly suggestive” and “narrow scope of protection” defense to be presented, arguing that the Indiana company simply doesn’t have a strong enough trademark to enforce. Based on the location of the defendant (California), we might also see some preliminary jurisdictional challenges. Or, if the defendant doesn’t have the stomach for a legal fight in federal court in Indiana, a quick name change could be a potential outcome.

Stay tuned for updates.

HealthSmart Foods, Inc. v. Sweet Nothings, Inc. et al.

Court Case Number: 3:23-cv-00060
File Date: April 13, 2023
Plaintiff: HealthSmart Foods, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Joshua A. Claybourn of Jackson Kelly PLLC
Defendant: Beth Porter, Sweet Nothings, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, State Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Matthew P. Brookman
Referred To: Mark J. Dinsmore

Complaint:

Knockoff Chinese Jewelry prompts Indiana Copyright Lawsuit

12 Wednesday Apr 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

An Indiana copyright lawsuit has been filed by Taylor Shaye Designs, a jewelry designer and retailer/wholesaler from Louisiana.

The defendant, located in Whitestown, Indiana, is the apparent U.S. sales and distribution arm of the global Shein conglomerate, a Chinese online fast fashion retailer that is known for selling inexpensive apparel, jewelry, and other accessories.

The defendant is accused of copying the plaintiff’s registered “Let’s Go Girls” jewelry design.

The standard for determining whether the reproduction right in a copyrighted work has been infringed is “substantial similarity.” Blog readers can judge for themselves whether the above designs have substantial similarity. Hopefully the lawsuit will see an argument that the designs are not substantially similar but I anticipate either a jurisdictional challenge or a discrete settlement as the most likely outcomes. Either way, stay tuned to this blog for updates.

Taylor Shaye Designs LLC v. Shein Distribution Corp.

Court Case Number: 1:23-cv-00624-SEB-TAB
File Date: April 11, 2023
Plaintiff: Taylor Shaye Designs LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Bradley M. Stohry of Reichel Story Dean LLP
Defendant: Shein Distribution Corp.
Cause: Direct Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Copyright Infringement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Sarah Evans Barker
Referred To: Tim A. Baker

Complaint:

March 2023 Indiana Intellectual Property Litigation Update

15 Wednesday Mar 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

February was a very quiet month in Indiana intellectual property litigation. A few parties filed a Motion to Dismiss in an attempt to avoid litigation in Indiana, but there are no rulings yet. A few settlement conferences were reported as successful, so we can expect a few more cases to be dismissed by next month. Stay tuned for updates on all ongoing copyright and trademark lawsuits.

Sears Authorized Hometown Stores, LLC v. Lynn Retail, Inc. et al. (SD, filed 6/4/2021) – The settlement deadline has been extended by motion to March 27, 2023.

Noble Roman’s, Inc. v. AMI Stores Management, Inc. et al. (SD, filed 6/6/2021) –  A settlement conference was held on February 21, 2023, apparently with no success, as the Court opines “it does not appear that another settlement conference at this time would be productive.” On March 3, 2023, Noble Roman’s filed its Reply Brief for its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.

Forest River, Inc. v. inTech Trailers, Inc. (ND, filed 8/31/2021) – On February 22, 2023, a hearing was held on the Defendant’s Motion to Compel. The Court ruled on March 10, 2023 that the Plaintiff must produce an unredacted document. On March 14, the parties filed a joint motion to continue dispositive motion deadlines.

Thomas v. ooShirts, Inc. et al. (SD, filed 9/24/2021) – A new attorney, Lenny Huang, has appeared on behalf of the Defendants and the original attorneys have withdrawn.

Edutainment Live, LLC v. Video Game Palooza et al. (SD, filed 10/11/2021) – A Notice of Settlement was filed on March 2, 2023 and the Court has ordered dismissal documents to be filed within 30 days.

Gabet et al. v. Amazon.com. Inc. et al. (ND, filed 1/20/2022) – A discovery conference was held on February 27, 2023.

The Evolutionary Level Above Human, Inc. v. Havel et al (ND, filed 5/18/2022) –  More motions were filed in the last month, including a successful Motion to Strike filed by the Plaintiff.

Broadcast Music, Inc. et al v. Thirty-Six Saloon, LLC d/b/a Thirty Six Saloon et al. (SD, filed 7/27/2022) – No update this month.

Schwartz v. Kilroy’s North America, LLC et al (SD, filed 8/5/2022) – The parties held a successful Settlement Conference on March 14, 2023. The Court has ordered the filing of dismissal documents within 30 days.

Oakley, Inc. v. Batter’s Box Training, LLC et al (SD, filed 8/11/2022) – The parties held a successful Settlement Conference on March 2, 2023. The Court has ordered the filing of dismissal documents by March 15, 2024.

Honest Abe Roofing franchise, Inc. v. DCH & Associates, LLC et al. (SD, filed 9/7/2022) –  The Plaintiff filed a Motion for Default Judgment on February 28, 2023.

Phoenix USA RV, Inc. v. Hoosier Custom Cruisers LLC et al. (ND, removed 10/7/2022) – No update this month.

MaddenCo Inc. v. Reed et al. (SD, filed 10/31/2022) – The Defendant HG Autotech had attorneys appear on February 22, 2022 who promptly filed a Motion to Dismiss on the same day and then a Motion to Withdraw two days later on February 24, 2022. Defendant Darby’s Motion to Dismiss is now fully-briefed.

The Center for Gestalt Development, Inc. v. Bowman (SD (11/09/2022) – A Telephonic Initial Pretrial Conference is scheduled for April 3, 2023.

1.4G Holdings, LLC v. North Central Industries, Inc. et al. (SD 1/05/2023) – On February 28, 2023, Defendant Brown filed a Motion to Dismiss.

The Plaintiff’s Response was filed on March 14, 2023.

Stross v. Lynn Boolman Auto Sales Limited Liability Company et al. (ND 1/25/2023) –  No update yet.

Albert’s Diamond Jewelers, Inc. v. AaLand Diamond Jewelers LLC (ND 2/01/2023) – The deadline for Defendant’s responsive pleading was extended to March 16, 2023. A telephonic pretrial conference is scheduled for April 6, 2023.

Delta Faucet Company v. Watkins et al. (SD 2/01/2023) – On February 27, 2023, Delta Faucet Company filed a Motion for Alternative Service of Process.

USA Football, Inc. v. Flag Football World Championship Tour, LLC et al. (SD 2/13/2023) – The Defendants have waived service of the Complaint. No other updates yet.

Freedom Mortgage Corporation v. Freedompoint, LLC (SD 2/14/2023) – Alyssa C.B. Cochran has appeared on behalf of Freedompoint. The deadline to respond to the Complaint has been extended to April 6, 2023.

Roller Ready, LLC v. LA Systems, LLC d/b/a Monkey Rung et al. (ND 2/14/2023) – No update yet.

February 2023 Updates – January 2023 Updates

December 2022 Updates –  December 2021 Updates

False Advertising Lawsuit filed in Indiana over Paint Roller Cleaners

21 Tuesday Feb 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Paint roller cleaners are the subject of the latest Indiana false advertising and trademark lawsuit. More specifically, the lawsuit involves the alleged behavior of defendants that held out a plaintiff’s product as their own while actually selling competing product.

The plaintiff is Roller Ready, LLC of Fort Wayne, Indiana, owner of trademark and patent rights in a ROLLER READY product that cleans paint rollers.

In 2021, Roller Ready agreed to let an individual promote their product at the 2021 National Hardware Show. However, the product was apparently promoted under the brand of another company, Monkey Rung. The product won an award and all resulting recognitions went to Monkey Rung rather than Roller Ready.

Online links about the Roller Ready product point to Monkey Rung’s website with a competing product. Monkey Rung controls, and seemingly won’t relinquish, an Amazon listing for the Roller Ready product. Monkey Rung even listed the Roller Ready product on its own website’s Product Portfolio (see Complaint below).

The defendants are accused of intentionally misleading the public and degrading Roller Ready’s goodwill. Defendants act as if they own the Roller Ready product, so maybe they think they do. There are often two sides to a story, so stay tuned for what will likely be an interesting Answer. The defendants are not from Indiana, so first there could be some jurisdictional challenges.

Roller Ready, LLC v. LA Systems, LLC d/b/a Monkey Rung et al.

Court Case Number: 1:23-cv-00068-HAB-SLC
File Date: February 14, 2023
Plaintiff: Roller Ready, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Benjamin D. Ice of Barrett McNagny LLP
Defendant: LA Systems, LLC d/b/a Monkey Rung, Paul Kiley
Cause: False Advertising, False Marking, Indiana Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Federal Trademark Infringement
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Holly A. Brady
Referred To: Susan L. Collins

Complaint: