Tag Archives: Conversion

Kingston, Indiana Grocery Store sued for Trademark Infringement

09 Friday Aug 2024

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

In addition to using an identical name, the defendant in the latest Indiana trademark lawsuit is accused of submitting a fraudulent letter to the Indiana Secretary of State claiming permission to use the name. The Kingston, Indiana grocery store is allegedly operating as “My Market” without the authorization of the plaintiff, who has prior rights in the name.

The plaintiff and defendants likely have some personal background that isn’t discussed in the Complaint (below). If so, the Answer may shed more light on why the defendant thought it had permission to use the name “My Market.”

Stay tuned for updates.

My Market LLC v. Batth Markets Inc. et al.

Court Case Number: 1:24-cv-01335-MPB-MJD
File Date: August 6, 2024
Plaintiff: My Market LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: C. Christopher Dubes, Amanda C. Delekta of Carson LLP
Defendant: Batth Markets Inc., Chhaterpal Singh
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Trademark Dilution, Federal Unfair Competition, Conversion
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Matthew P. Brookman
Referred To: Mark J. Dinsmore

Complaint:

Freedom Mortgage (with Roundpoint subsidiary) sues Freedompoint for Trademark Infringement

17 Friday Feb 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

The plaintiff in this trademark lawsuit, Freedom Mortgage Corporation, has been providing mortgage banking services using its FREEDOM MORTGAGE trademark since December 1992. Freedom Mortgage also has a wholly owned subsidiary called Roundpoint which has provided mortgage banking services since January 2009.

In April 2021, the defendant, Freedompoint, LLC, began using the trademark FREEDOMPOINT in connection with mortgage banking services. The FREEDOMPOINT trademark was registered with the USPTO in August 2021 having received no “likelihood of confusion” refusal during the application process.

It seems that Freedom Mortgage disagrees with the USPTO, believing that there does exist a likelihood of confusion, considering FREEDOMPOINT to be an infringing combination of the FREEDOM MORTGAGE and ROUNDPOINT marks.

The combination argument is interesting, perhaps suggesting that consumers would incorrectly surmise that Freedom Mortgage, owner of the Roundpoint subsidiary, had simply merged the two companies. However, do consumers even know that Roundpoint is a wholly owned subsidiary of Freedom Mortgage? I reviewed both the Freedom Mortgage and Roundpoint websites and don’t see any mentions of the other company.

If consumers don’t have any reason to associate Roundpoint with Freedom Mortgage, then really there are just two applicable comparisons…Freedom Mortgage v. Freedompoint and Roundpoint vs. Freedompoint. The USPTO didn’t consider either to be confusingly similar but perhaps more “combination” evidence will be available for this lawsuit.

Stay tuned for Freedompoint’s Answer.

Freedom Mortgage Corporation v. Freedompoint, LLC

Court Case Number: 4:23-cv-00022-TWP-KMB
File Date: February 14, 2023
Plaintiff: Freedom Mortgage Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: Louis T. Perry of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Defendant: Freedompoint, LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, State Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Cancellation of U.S. Registration, Deception, Conversion, Forgery, Counterfeiting, Theft
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Kellie M. Barr

Complaint:

USA Football sues USA Flag for Trademark Infringement

16 Thursday Feb 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

USA Football organizes football training events for players, coaches, and officials. USA Football was endowed by the National Football League and the National Football League Players Association in 2002.

USA Football has filed a lawsuit in Indiana attempting to prevent the use of the mark USA FLAG in connection with flag football tournaments and leagues. The parties to the lawsuit have a lengthy history, with Defendant Burnett first approaching USA Football in 2017 about a potential collaboration. Over the following years, the relationship involved both a Consulting Agreement and an Event Collaboration Agreement between the parties. However, per the Complaint (below), USA Football always maintained that the USA FLAG mark could not be used, previously opposing a USA FLAG trademark application.

Unable to successfully persuade/convince USA Flag to stop using an allegedly confusingly similar trademark, USA Football now seeks court intervention, including requests for injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees. As USA Flag seems dug into its position, this lawsuit could get interesting. USA Flag previously chose not to defend in the trademark opposition proceeding, resulting in a notice of default. Surely USA Flag won’t attempt that same strategy in federal court. Stay tuned for updates.

USA Football, Inc. v. Flag Football World Championship Tour, LLC et al.

Court Case Number: 1:23-cv-00274-TWP-KMB
File Date: February 13, 2023
Plaintiff: USA Football, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Amie N. Peele of Peele Law Group, PC; Louis T. Perry of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Defendants: Flag Football World Championship Tour, LLC, USA Flag, LLC, Travis Burnett
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Contributory Trademark Infringement, Vicarious Trademark Infringement, Unjust Enrichment, Conversion, Deception, Indiana Crime Victim’s Relief Act
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Kellie M. Barr

Complaint:

Elkhart RV Manufacturer sues Former Employees for Conversion, Trade Dress Infringement

11 Tuesday Oct 2022

Posted by in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trade Dress

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The plaintiff in this lawsuit is Phoenix USA RV, an RV manufacturer located in Elkhart, Indiana, the RV Capital of the World.

The defendants are a large group of former Phoenix USA employees and the competitor company they founded while still working at Phoenix USA. The defendants are accused of sabotaging the plaintiff’s operations, stealings its tangible and intellectual property, and using a stolen RV design to build a prototype for a virtually identical RV. The allegedly infringing RV is now being marketed online and at RV trade shows.

The defendants are represented by Jonathan R. Slabaugh of Sanders Pianowski LLP. Based on the history detailed in the Complaint (below), we can probably expect some fireworks once everything gets going. Employment disputes involving just one employee can get messy, but this situation involves a whole company’s worth of ex-employees plus their new competing company.

This lawsuit was removed from Elkhart Superior Court to the Northern District of Indiana. Stay tuned for updates.

Phoenix USA RV, Inc. v. Hoosier Custom Cruisers LLC et al.

Court Case Number: 3:22-cv-00855
File Date: October 7, 2022
Plaintiff: Phoenix USA RV, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Paul E. Harold, Stephen M. Judge of SouthBank Legal
Defendants: Hoosier Custom Cruisers LLC et al.
Cause: Conversion, Criminal Conversion, Theft, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Federal Unfair Competition, Trade Dress Dilution, Common Law Trade Dress Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Damon R. Leichty
Referred To: Michael G. Gotsch, Sr.

Complaint:

Poulsen files Trademark Lawsuit in Indiana over Counterfeit “Ingrid Bergman” Roses

15 Thursday Jul 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet –William Shakespeare, Romeo & Juliet

Poulsen Roser is a family-owned Danish company world-famous for its breeding of distinctive rose varieties, for which it obtains patent and trademark protection. A lawsuit has been filed in the Southern District of Indiana involving their INGRID BERGMAN rose, a “unique currant red hybrid tea rose variety.” Poulsen owns a U.S. trademark registration for INGRID BERGMAN in connection with “live roses.”

The Defendants operate one of the U.S.’s largest wholesale rose growers, distributing flowers to garden centers, nurseries, and mail order outlets.

This lawsuit arises because the Defendants are allegedly producing, advertising, selling, and distributing unauthorized roses using the Poulsen’s INGRID BERGMAN mark. Further bibliographical information on the Defendants’ website about their “counterfeit” roses (see screenshot) might suggest to consumers that they are in fact authentic Poulsen roses.

Surely this situation can’t be as cut and dried as the Complaint (below) would imply. A large wholesale grower like the Defendants would certainly understand the implications of selling unauthorized rose varieties and know they couldn’t escape detection. We’ll have to stay tuned for their Answer and another possible side of the story.

Poulsen Roser A/S vs. Gardens Alive, Inc. et al.

Case Number: 4:21-cv-00113-SEB-DML
File Date: Wednesday, July 14, 2021
Plaintiff: Poulsen Roser A/S
Plaintiff Counsel: Louis T. Perry of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Defendant: Gardens Alive, Inc., Early Morning LLC d/b/a Weeks Roses
Cause: Federal Trademark Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competion, Federal False Designation of Origin, Common Law Unfair Competition, Conversion, Theft
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Sarah Evans Barker
Referred To: Debra McVicker Lynch

Complaint: