Tag Archives: Cancellation

Northern Indiana Chiropractors fight over “Legacy” Trademark

13 Tuesday Aug 2024

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

A Shipshewana, Indiana-based chiropractor has been operating under the name Legacy Chiropractic since March 2018.

41 miles away, in Warsaw, Indiana, another chiropractor began operating as Legacy Family Chiropractic around March 2020. Prior to opening, the Warsaw chiropractor’s wife had allegedly inquired about purchasing the rights to the name. There was no agreement to sell the name per the Complaint (below), but the Warsaw chiropractor still proceeded with a “Legacy” name.

After 4 years of coexistence, perhaps not always peaceful, a federal trademark application was filed by the Shipshewana chiropractor on July 29, 2024. On the same morning, an Indiana state trademark registration was applied for and obtained by the Warsaw chiropractor, quickly resulting in a few weeks of back-and-forth attorney communications and now a lawsuit in the Northern District of Indiana.

Stay tuned for updates.

Legacy Chiropractic, LLC v. Legacy Family Chiropractic LLC

Court Case Number: 3:24-cv-00668-DRL-MGG
File Date: August 9, 2024
Plaintiff: Legacy Chiropractic, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: D. Randall Brown, Michael E. Wever of Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Defendant: Legacy Family Chiropractic LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Anti-Cybersquatting, Unfair Competition and Deceptive Trademark Practices, Cancellation of Indiana State Trademark Registration
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Damon R. Leichty
Referred To: Michael G. Gotsch, Sr.

Complaint:

Can “SQUARE DONUTS” be a trademark for square-shaped donuts?

24 Thursday Mar 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

I donut know. But this lawsuit should give us the answer.

First off, I like when complaints have a nice succinct Nature of the Action section at the beginning. This one sums up the lawsuit well:

“Family Express seeks a declaration that its use of the name “SQUARE DONUTS” in association with its sale of square-shaped donuts at Family Express convenience stores does not infringe Defendant’s asserted trademark rights in “SQUARE DONUTS.”

There is some background. Square Donuts has been selling donuts of all shapes and sizes, including square-shaped, in central Indiana since 1965.

Family Express, a purveyor of convenience stores throughout northern Indiana, started selling square-shaped donuts in 2005, calling them, simply enough, “Square Donuts.”

The parties have been arguing since 2006 when Square Donuts first sent a cease and desist demand to Family Express over the use of the “Square Donuts” trademark. Since that time, Family Express has maintained that “SQUARE DONUTS” was merely descriptive of square-shaped donuts and, therefore, Square Donuts did not and could not assert exclusive rights to use the name “SQUARE DONUTS.”

Apparently 10 years of arguing was the limit for Family Express (and they really don’t want to give their donuts another name, like “Square Doughnuts”), thus leading to this action seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and cancellation of Square Donuts’ federal and state trademark registrations.

Both parties will want a final resolution so this litigation could go the distance. Stay tuned for updates.

Screen Shot 2016-03-24 at 8.15.14 AM

Family Express Corporation v. Square Donuts Inc.

Court Case Number: 2:16-cv-00103-TLS-JEM
File Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2016
Plaintiff: Family Express Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: P. Stephen Fardy, Jonna McGinley Reilly of Swanson, Martin & Bell, LLP
Defendant: Square Donuts Inc.
Cause: Declaration of Non-Infringement, Cancellation
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Theresa L. Springmann
Referred To: John E. Martin

Complaint: