Tag Archives: Federal Unfair Competition

Eli Lilly sues to prevent online sale of unauthorized foreign pet medications

07 Thursday Jul 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The defendant in this trademark lawsuit, an online pet supply store, is alleged to be selling unauthorized foreign pet medication in the United States. According to the Complaint (below), foreign medications, primarily from South Africa, are being sold in violation of FDA mandates.

The specific brands at issue are ELANCO, COMFORTIS, TRIFEXIS, INTERCEPTOR and CAPSTAR pet medicines.

The Honorable Jane Magnus Stinson entered a default judgment and injunction against the prior owners of the same website on June 13, 2014, in Case No. 1:13-cv-01800-JMS-DML. New owners subsequently resumed and expanded sales, hence this follow-up lawsuit.

Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 12.08.23 PM

Eli Lilly Company et al. v. Best Value Pet Supplies

Court Case Number: 1:16-cv-01787-RLY-DML
File Date: Tuesday, July 5, 2016
Plaintiff: Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis Tiergesundheit AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Jan M. Carroll, Anne N. DePrez of Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Defendant: Scott Martin d/b/a Best Value Pet Supplies, Does 1-10
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Indiana Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Debra McVicker Lynch

Complaint:

Indiana Botanic Gardens files lawsuit to protect EUCAMINT trademark

01 Wednesday Jun 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

This trademark dispute between Hobart, Indiana-based Indiana Botanic Gardens and a California defendant involves the use of the trademark EUCAMINT in connection with camphorated ointments. The Plaintiff has used its trademark since 1925.

The Defendant has been using the EUCAMINT mark in connection with a eucalyptus shower mist since as early as 2013.

Camphor used to be made by distilling the bark and wood of the camphor tree. Today, camphor is chemically manufactured from turpentine oil. It is used in products such as Vicks VapoRub. –WebMD

Indiana Botanic Gardens Inc v. Snyder Manufacturing Corporation

Court Case Number: 2:16-cv-00197-JD-PRC
File Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2016
Plaintiff: Indiana Botanic Gardens, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David C. Brezina, Boris Umansky of Ladas & Parry LLP
Defendant: Snyder Manufacturing Corporation d/b/a Eurospa Aromatics d/b/a Eurospa Chemicals
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Jon E. DeGuilio
Referred To: Paul R. Cherry

Complaint:

Trademark lawsuit filed over HYDRAPURE (pipe fittings) vs. HYPERPURE (plumbing pipes)

09 Monday May 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

This lawsuit arises out of Defendant’s allegedly infringing use of the HYPERPURE mark in violation of Plaintiff’s registered trademark HYDRAPURE®.

Plaintiff uses its trademark in connection with pipe fittings and related parts. Defendant uses its trademark in connection with plumbing pipes.
Screen Shot 2016-05-09 at 9.36.33 AM

NIBCO Inc. v. Legend Valve & Fitting, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-00275-JVB-CAN
File Date: Friday, May 6, 2016
Plaintiff: NIBCO Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Matthew J. Gipson of Price Heneveld LLP
Defendant: Legend Valve & Fitting, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Joseph S. Van Bokkelen
Referred To: Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Complaint:

Klipsch sues eBay Seller for Unauthorized Sale of Speakers

04 Wednesday May 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Klipsch, manufacturer of high-end audio speakers, is suing an eBay seller, HumanAudio, for unauthorized sales of its speakers.

In addition to selling “brand new” Klipsch speakers at discounted prices, the defendant is also accused of removing and replacing serial numbers, thus voiding any Klipsch warranty for the unwary end customer. Allowing an unauthorized licensor to continue with discounted sales undermines authorized distributors who must contractually maintain higher prices. Pressure from both authorized distributors and customers left without a warranty essentially forces legal action from Klipsch in this situation.

HumanAudio’s Klipsch speaker sales appear to continue unabated. Stay tuned for updates.

Screen Shot 2016-05-04 at 8.11.18 AM

Klipsch Group, Inc. v. Steve Myers d/b/a HumanAudio

Court Case Number: 1:16-cv-01034-WTL-MPB
File Date: Tuesday, May 3, 2016
Plaintiff: Klipsch Group, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Dean E. McConnell of Indiano & McConnell LLC
Defendant: Steve Myers d/b/a HumanAudio
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: William T. Lawrence
Referred To: Matthew P. Brookman

Complaint:

Sign Company sues Former Employee for Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition

18 Monday Apr 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Defendant, a former employee of Plaintiff, is alleged to use have used Plaintiff’s company resources to benefit his own competing business. The Complaint (below) describes in detail (truly…the Complaint goes up to Exhibit JJJ) how Defendant apparently falsely claimed credit for Plaintiff’s past achievements and client relationships.

Stay tuned for updates.

Screen Shot 2016-04-18 at 7.44.39 AM

Landmark Signs Inc v. I C U Outdoor Advertising LLC et al

Court Case Number: 2:16-cv-00128-RLM-JEM
File Date: Friday, April 15, 2016
Plaintiff: Landmark Signs Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Cori A. Mathis of Hilbrich Cunningham Dobosz Vinovich & Sandoval, LLC
Defendant: I C U Advertising LLC, Lawrence M. Yurko
Cause: Federal Unfair Competition, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, State Unfair Competition, Tortious Interference with a Business Relationship, Tortious Interference with a Prospective Economic Advantage, Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices, Federal Trademark Infringement, State Trademark Infringement, Illinois Trademark Infringement
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Robert L. Miller, Jr.
Referred To: John E. Martin

Complaint:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – NETZSCH PREMIER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. PHLER FEINMAHLTECHNIK GMBH et al

11 Monday Apr 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Defendant is alleged to be involved in the advertising, promotion, and sale of counterfeit mixers, dispersers, mills, and related products.

Screen Shot 2016-04-11 at 9.44.51 AM

NETZSCH PREMIER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. PHLER FEINMAHLTECHNIK GMBH et al

Court Case Number: 1:16-cv-00781-WTL-MPB
File Date: Friday, April 8, 2016
Plaintiff: NETZSCH PREMIER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Jeffrey Kose, Patrick F.X. Fitzpatrick, Jr. of Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Fronoff LLP
Defendant: PHLER FEINMAHLTECHNIK GMBH et al
Cause: Trademark Counterfeiting, Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, False Description, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: William T. Lawrence
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 publication Rough Notes sues over “plaque” solicitations

09 Tuesday Feb 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Most professionals will be familiar with the type of solicitation involved in this lawsuit.

Defendant, based in Connecticut, sells customized plaques for people and companies that have been featured in newspapers or magazines. Defendant promotes its product by directly emailing (repeatedly) the individuals featured in the magazine/newspaper with a solicitation to purchase a customized plaque featuring the article. (See examples in the photo and Exhibit C below.) Defendant’s products consist of a scanned copy of the article and publication’s title inserted into an acrylic, wood or aluminum frame. Defendant has allegedly sold over 200,000 plaques.

Plaintiff, a long-standing Indiana publication focused on insurance agents, is one target of Defendant’s activities. Notably, Plaintiff also provides its own free high-quality reprint plaques to individuals profiled in its magazine. Plaintiff brings this lawsuit against Defendant based on the unauthorized use of its trademark and copyrighted materials, among other claims.

Screen Shot 2016-02-09 at 11.06.34 AM

The Rough Notes Company, Inc. v. That’s Great News, LLC

Court Case Number: 1:2016-cv-00319
File Date: Monday, February 8, 2016
Plaintiff: The Rough Notes Company, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David J. Carr, Paul C. Sweeney, Jana E. Harris of Ice Miller LLP
Defendant: That’s Great News, LLC
Cause: Copyright Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Federal Trademark Dilution, Common Law Unfair Competition, Unjust Enrichment
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Sarah Evans Barker
Referred To: Mark J. Dinsmore

Complaint:

Exhibit C (Sample e-mail solicitations):

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Barrington Music Products v. Guitar Center Stores

08 Friday Jan 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

This trademark dispute involves Plaintiff’s registered VENTO trademark and an allegedly infringing VENTUS mark, both used in connection with wind instruments.

Barrington Music Products Inc v. Guitar Center Stores, Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-02031-TWP-TAB
File Date: Thursday, January 7, 2016
Plaintiff: Barrington Music Products
Plaintiff Counsel: John D. LaDue, Sean J. Quinn of LaDue | Curran | Kuehn
Defendant: Music & Arts Centers, Guitar Center Stores, Inc., Eastman Music Company
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Dilution, Trade Name Infringement under Indiana Common Law, Passing Off
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Robert L. Miller, Jr.
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Complaint:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Indiana Botanic Gardens v. Vitalmax Vitamins

21 Monday Dec 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

This trademark dispute involves the ACCU HEAR and ACCU-HEAR trademarks, both used in connection with nutritional supplements.

Screenshot from Complaint

Indiana Botanic Gardens, Inc. v. Almark Products, Inc d/b/a Vitalmax Vitamins

Court Case Number: 2:15-cv-00457-JVB-APR
File Date: Friday, December 18, 2015
Plaintiff: Indiana Botanic Gardens, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David C. Brezina, Boris Umansky of Ladas & Parry LLP
Defendant: Almark Products, Inc d/b/a Vitalmax Vitamins
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Joseph S. Van Bokkelen
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Andrew P. Rodovich

Complaint: