Tag Archives: False Advertising

Terre Haute Endocrinology Center sues competing medical center for not having an Endocrinologist in its “Endocrinology Department”

24 Thursday Aug 2017

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

The Plaintiffs in this lawsuit are an endocrinologist and his medical center in Terre Haute, Indiana, providing endocrinology care and services.

The Defendant is a competing medical center in Terre Haute. Allegedly, the Defendant lost its last board-certified endocrinology physician in 2014 but continues to advertise that it has an “Endocrinology Department.”

Per the Complaint (below):

“due to the use of ‘endocrinology’ in its advertising and representations to the public, patients and potential patients are led to believe that there is a physician practicing at Defendant’s facility that is board-certified in the specialty of endocrinology.”

To Plaintiff, which is a competing medical center in the area that does employ a board-certified endocrinologist, this constitutes false advertising and unfair competition.

The case was originally filed in Vigo Superior Court but removed to the Southern District of Indiana.

Pittman et al. v. Union Medical Group LLC

Court Case Number:2:17-cv-00393-JMS-MPB
File Date: Tuesday, August 15, 2017
Plaintiff: Isaiah Pittman IV, MD, HPW Center For Diabetes, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Paul J. Jungers of Wagner, Crawford, Gambill and Jungers
Defendant: Union Medical Group LLC
Cause: False Advertising, Indiana Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Referred To: Matthew P. Brookman

Complaint: 

Garden Flag Manufacturer sues Former Reseller for Trademark Infringement, Cybersquatting

04 Thursday May 2017

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

This lawsuit involves a garden flag manufacturer and a former reseller that continued selling product without authorization, as well as registering various infringing domain names. The Defendants’ bad faith use of the domain names has already been deterring by a WIPO proceeding.

Toland Home Garden v. PH Technologies et al.

Court Case Number: 3:17-cv-00336-PPS-MGG
File Date: Tuesday, May 2, 2017
Plaintiff: Toland International Ltd. and Marketing Resource Group, Inc. d/b/a Toland Home Garden
Plaintiff Counsel: Todd Gale, Jennifer Fraser of Dykema Gossett PLLC
Defendant: PH Technologies, LLC, Philip S. Horvath
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, False Advertising, Unfair Competition, Federal Cybersquatting, Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation, Common Law Unfair Competition, Common Law Unjust Enrichment
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Philip P. Simon
Referred To: Michael G. Gotsch, Sr.

Complaint: 

 

Coach sues Knox, Indiana Convenience Store over Counterfeit Purses

05 Tuesday Apr 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

The Defendants in this lawsuit, the owners of a convenience store located in Knox, Indiana, are accused of selling counterfeit Coach merchandise. The counterfeit purses were observed for sale in the store on multiple occasions by a Coach investigator and Homeland Security Investigations officer.

Selling counterfeit merchandise is, not surprisingly, a big no-no and Coach takes its intellectual property very seriously, hence this lawsuit containing trademark, copyright and trade dress claims.

Stay tuned for updates.

Screen Shot 2016-04-05 at 8.38.21 AM

Coach, Inc. et al v. Zip Thru Mart et al

Court Case Number: 3:2016-cv-00209-JD-CAN
File Date: Monday, April 4, 2016
Plaintiff: Coach, Inc., Coach Services, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: P. Russell Pardew of Locke Lord LLP
Defendant: Zip Thru Mart, Charles Estok, Sr., Janice Estok
Cause: Trademark Counterfeiting, Trademark Infringement, Trade Dress Infringement, False Designation of Origin, False Advertising, Trademark Dilution, Copyright Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Unjust Enrichment
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Jon E. DeGuilio
Referred To: Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Complaint:

The Great American Bagel files Trademark Lawsuit over Rearranged Signage

25 Friday Mar 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

I’ll let the two trademarks at issue here speak for themselves – THE GREAT AMERICAN BAGEL (stylized) vs. THE GREAT AMERICAN EAGLE (nearly identically stylized). Check out the comparison images from the Complaint:

Screen Shot 2016-03-25 at 7.30.10 AM

The remarkable similarity is, not surprisingly, no coincidence. Defendant obtained an old sign previously used by Plaintiff and apparently opted to save money by just rearranging a few letters and calling his gas station/convenience store “The Great American Eagle”.

As Defendants’ convenience store sells food products, Plaintiff has alleged consumer confusion and is seeking damages and injunctive relief.

Stay tuned for updates.

The Great American Bagel Enterprises, Inc. v. United HBA Corporation et al

Court Case Number:3:16-cv-00038-RLY-MPB
File Date: Thursday, March 24, 2016
Plaintiff: The Great American Bagel Enterprises Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stacy K. Newton of Jackson Kelly PLLC
Defendant: United HBA Corporation and Harbhajan Singh, d/b/a The Great American Eagle
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, False Advertising, Unfair Competition, Trade Name Infringement, Passing Off, Unjust Enrichment
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Matthew P. Bookman

Complaint:

Hoverboard Maker Swagway Sued by UL for Trademark Counterfeiting

19 Friday Feb 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

If you live anywhere near an electrical outlet (meaning all of you except those few remaining readers of the Indiana IP Zine), you’ve likely seen the Plaintiff’s trademark.

Plaintiff’s UL Certification Marks appear on “billions of household, consumer, commercial, and industrial products including refrigeration equipment, lighting products, cable, wiring, building materials, life safety vests, electric signs, batteries and power packs for computers and consumer electronics, traffic signals, sprinklers, and cash registers.”

The “UL” mark certifies that the product has been tested, inspected and satisfies applicable safety standards. Turn over whatever electrical device is closest and the “UL” probably is on there somewhere. (If not, back away slowly…) 

Defendant makes and sells the explosively popular Swagway hoverboard. Despite having never been tested nor inspected by UL, the Swagway product “allegedly used a mark that is identical to or substantially indistinguishable from the UL Certification Marks to falsely suggest that their Swagway hoverboard products have been tested, inspected, and certified by Plaintiff.”

Screen Shot 2016-02-19 at 6.13.13 AM

Further claims by Defendant’s CEO that the product was UL-certified along with significant safety concerns about the product, detailed in the Complaint below, led to this lawsuit.

UL LLC v. Swagway, LLC et al

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-00075-RLM-CAN
File Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2016
Plaintiff: UL LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Thomas F. Waggoner of Straub, Seamen & Allen, P.C.
Defendant: Swagway, LLC, Jianqing “Johnny” Zhu
Cause: Federal Trademark Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, False Advertising, Violation of the Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Robert L. Miller, Jr.
Referred To: Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Complaint:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Agdia Inc. v. Jun Qiang Xia et al

17 Tuesday Feb 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Jun Q. Xia was employed by Agdia until 2001. After leaving the company, Xia allegedly violated the terms of a non-competition agreement. The ensuing lawsuit was resolved by a permanent injunction order in 2002. Later, Xia formed AC Diagnostics, which directly competes with Agdia. The AC Diagnostics website, acdiainc.com, is only one letter different than Agdia Inc and Xia allegedly covertly embedded the Agdia name into the website so that it was searchable without being visible.

Agdia Incorporated v. Jun Qiang Xia and AC Diagnostics, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00075
File Date: Monday, February 16, 2015
Plaintiff: Agdia Incorporated
Plaintiff Counsel: James M. Lewis, Michael J. Hays of Tuesley Hall Konopa LLP
Defendant: Jun Qiang Xia, AC Diagnostics, Inc.
Cause: Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin and False Advertising, CyberPiracy, Common Law Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Jon E. DeGuilio
Magistrate Judge: Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Indiana Trade Dress Litigation Update – Archetype Ltd. v. LTD Commodities LLC

08 Sunday Feb 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

This trade dress lawsuit involves battery-operated motion detecting lighting. Defendant has allegedly “willfully and deliberately pulled a ‘bait and switch’ on consumers by advertising [Plaintiff’s] high-end […] product and then shipping a low-end inferior lighting to consumers.” Plaintiff is located in New Jersey and Defendant is located in Illinois…jurisdiction purportedly arises from Defendant’s sales to Indiana consumers.

Archetype Ltd. v. LTD Commodities LLC

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-00106-RLY-DKL
File Date: Monday, January 26, 2015
Plaintiff: Archetype Ltd.
Plaintiff Counsel: Dean E. McConnell of McConnell Intellectual Property Law
Defendant: LTD Commodities LLC
Cause: Trade Dress Infringement, False Designation of Origin or Sponsorship and Passing Off, False Advertising, Trade Dress Dilution
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Denise K. LaRue

Complaint:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Best Chairs Incorporated v. Factory Direct Wholesale

09 Friday May 2014

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Plaintiff, based in Ferdinand, Indiana, sells chairs and other furniture under the BEST CHAIRS trademark. Defendant is allegedly selling competing furniture products under the BESTCHAIR and BEST CHAIR marks. Despite multiple contacts from Plaintiff, Defendant has refused to refrain from selling under the allegedly infringing mark.

Best Chairs Incorporated v. Factory Direct Wholesale, LLC

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00067-RLY-WGH
File Date: Wednesday, May 07, 2014
Plaintiff: Best Chairs Incorporated
Plaintiff Counsel: Amy B. Berge of Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP
Defendant: Factory Direct Wholesale, LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, False Advertising, False Designation of Origin, State Unfair Competition, Indiana Crime Victims Act
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann, Jr.

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Sprint Solutions et al v. Reginald Aldridge et al

03 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by in Intellectual Property

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Plaintiff Sprint accuses three defendants of profiting from the illegal acquisition and resale of new Sprint phones. The Complaint is lengthy, detailing both Sprint’s business model and the Defendants’ alleged “Bulk Handset Theft and Trafficking Scheme,” in addition to fourteen claims. Presumably, in addition to civil penalties, the actions alleged by the Plaintiffs could also result in criminal penalties for Defendants.

Sprint Solutions, Inc. et al v. Reginald Aldridge et al

Court Case Number: 1:14-cv-00128-TWP-DML
File Date: Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Plaintiff: Sprint Solutions, Inc., Sprint Communications Company LP, Boost Worldwide, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Matthew B. Millis, John D. Waller of Wooden & McLaughlin LLP
Defendant: Reginald Aldridge, Arrice Aldridge, Damion Transou
Cause: Unfair Competition, Tortious Interference with Business Relationships and Prospective Advantage, Civil Conspiracy, Unjust Enrichment, Conspiracy to Induce Breach of Contract, Common Law Fraud, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Trafficking in Computer Passwords, Unauthorized Access, Unauthorized Access with Intent to Defraud, Federal Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, False Advertising, Contributory Trademark Infringement, Conversion
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch

Wounded Warrior Project sues Indiana Veteran over Critical Comments on Website

25 Monday Nov 2013

Posted by in Intellectual Property

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Plaintiff, Wounded Warrior Project, is a Virginia-based nonprofit that claims to provide comfort items to service members injured in combat. Defendant Help Indiana Vets operates an Indiana-based website (run by a U.S. Army veteran) that is critical of Plaintiff’s operations, asserting that “Wounded Warrior Project is a Fraud.” Wounded Warrior Project responded by filing this lawsuit in an attempt to force Defendant to change the website.

All Veterans Memorial

Defendant seems intent on fighting the lawsuit on behalf of “all Wounded Warriors” and is soliciting donations for a legal defense fund. Veterans, bloggers, free speech and anti-censorship advocates will likely be interested in supporting Defendant in this litigation but it will be an uphill battle since Plaintiff already has a team of high-powered attorneys.

Stay tuned for updates.

Wounded Warrior Project, Inc. v. Help Indiana Vets, Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-01857-RLY-DML
File Date: Thursday, November 21, 2013
Plaintiff: Wounded Warrior Project, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Jessica M. Lindemann of Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Defendant: Help Indiana Vets, Inc., Dean M. Graham
Cause: False Advertising, Criminal Deception, Defamation, Common Law Unfair Competition, Tortious Interference with Business Relationships, Unjust Enrichment
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch