Tag Archives: Litigation Update

Pro Se Plaintiff sues The Mind Trust, Indianapolis Public Schools for Copyright Infringement (Again)

14 Monday Sep 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

At its core, this is a copyright lawsuit involving educational “models.” However, this lawsuit is particularly interesting for several reasons. Here are a few:

  1. It’s a pro se plaintiff, hence a non-traditional intellectual property complaint. While only copyright claims seem at issue, the complaint was filed (again, by a pro se) as a 42 USC 1983 civil rights complaint.
  2. Several large, high-profile defendants. Which will take the lead? The complaint focuses on the “Bridges to Success Education School Model” and the “Phalen Leadership Academies Education School Model.”
  3. The copyright application (included in the complaint) was apparently also a pro se copyright application.
  4. Plaintiff has requested a Cease and Desist Order preventing several schools systems from using specific educational “Models” until the lawsuit is resolved.
  5. This is the first “intellectual property” lawsuit filed in the Northern District of Indiana since June 19. Welcome back!

For now, I’ll leave it to the Defendants’ lawyers to parse all the facts and allegations in the Complaint. Stay tuned for updates.

Angela E. Brooks-Ngwenya v. The Mind Trust et al

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-00255-JD-SLC
File Date: Friday, September 11, 2015
Plaintiff: Angela E. Brooks-Ngwenya
Plaintiff Counsel: Angela E. Brooks-Ngwenya – Pro Se
Defendant: The Mind Trust, United Way of Central Indiana, Central Indiana Education Alliance, Phalen Leadership Academies, Indianapolis Public Schools
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Jon E. DeGuilio
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Susan L. Collins

Complaint:

Prior Court of Appeals Decision:

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Baby Trend v. Phil and Teds Most Excellent Buggy Company

31 Monday Aug 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Plaintiff Baby Trend has used the registered NAVIGATOR trademark in connection with strollers and related products for over fifteen years.

Defendant, a New Zealand limited company, is alleged to be selling a stroller under an identical trademark (see Complaint below for photographs). Plaintiff’s cease-and-desist communications to Defendant beginning in June 2015 have proven unsuccessful, hence this lawsuit.

Baby Trend Inc. v. Phil and Teds Most Excellent Buggy Company Ltd.

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-01353-TWP-TAB
File Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2015
Plaintiff: Baby Trend Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: R. Trevor Carter, Brad R. Maurer of Faegre Baker Daniels LLP
Defendant: Phil and Teds Most Excellent Buggy Company Ltd.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin, Common Law Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker

Another Richard Bell Copyright Suit

26 Friday Jun 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Richard Bell is suing another website for allegedly using an unauthorized copy of his photograph of downtown Indianapolis. In a previous ruling against Mr. Bell (more here), the court was less than pleased with shortcomings in his complaint:

While providing specific facts is not necessary in a complaint, Mr. Bell is required to do more than recite legal conclusions of conduct with generic applicability to various defendants. . . . Legal conclusions are not afforded the assumption of truth. . . . [T]he Court will not afford the assumption of truth to the legal conclusions in Mr. Bell’s complaint. Neither does the Court find any factual allegations that are not legal conclusions, which could entitle him to relief and satisfy the standard of review.

Bell v. McCann, No. 1:13-CV-00799-TWP, 2014 WL 900961, at *2 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 7, 2014)

Mr. Bell did offer more than legal conclusions in this most recent Complaint (see below) by adding a factual allegation. And although he needed to allege “only enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face,” Mr. Bell decided to unnecessarily add proof of these alleged facts. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). He included a link to a screenshot of the alleged infringement, although the link just resolves to a blank page.

In any case, don’t use pictures you find on the internet without authorization. Just don’t.

Richard N. Bell v. Proact Search LLC

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-01005-JMS-DKL
File Date: Thursday, June 25, 2015
Plaintiff: Richard N. Bell
Plaintiff Counsel: Richard N. Bell of Bell Law Firm
Defendant: Proact Search LLC
Cause: Copyright Infringement and Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Denise K. LaRue

*Dismissed August 5, 2015*

Indiana Copyright Litigation Update – Bell v. Find Tickets

20 Saturday Jun 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Richard Bell is once again alleging copyright infringement for unauthorized use of a photograph of the downtown Indianapolis skyline. This complaint is nearly identical to complaints he has previously filed. In some of those cases, the court has awarded Mr. Bell statutory damages of $2,500. However, the ruling in each of those cases was a default judgment because the defendants failed to answer and defend the allegations. On multiple occasions the court has granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. District Judge Tanya Pratt has, on multiple occasions, called out Mr. Bell for improper practice:

In his pleadings, Mr. Bell has alleged, but has not shown, that he is entitled to relief. His complaint contains formulaic labels and conclusions, but not facts. For example, the complaint under his copyright claim generically alleges that all-originally, twenty-two in total-Defendants: downloaded the Indianapolis Photo; willfully, recklessly, and falsely claimed that it owned the copyright to the photograph; published the photograph for commercial use; engaged in unfair trade practices and competition; and willfully engaged in these acts with oppression, fraud, and malice. . . . While providing specific facts is not necessary in a complaint, Mr. Bell is required to do more than recite legal conclusions of conduct with generic applicability to various defendants. . . . Legal conclusions are not afforded the assumption of truth. . . . [T]he Court will not afford the assumption of truth to the legal conclusions in Mr. Bell’s complaint. Neither does the Court find any factual allegations that are not legal conclusions, which could entitle him to relief and satisfy the standard of review.

Bell v. McCann, No. 1:13-CV-00799-TWP, 2014 WL 900961, at *2 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 7, 2014)

When looking to Mr. Bell’s motivation for filing this action, the Court finds that Mr. Bell’s motivation is questionable. Mr. Bell has filed a multiplicity of suits in this Court, each involving the same or similar infringement allegations. In many of these copyright infringement suits, Mr. Bell has improperly joined several defendants, thereby saving him extensive filing fees. In this case alone, Mr. Bell sued forty-seven defendants and then quickly offered settlements to defendants who were unwilling to pay for a legal defense. In some of Mr. Bell’s lawsuits, the district court determined that the improperly joined defendants should be severed, and severance was granted. Further, in this case, Mr. Bell lacked any evidentiary support for his claims against Mr. Lantz. The Court is persuaded by Mr. Lantz’s argument that the motivation of Mr. Bell in filing this action appears to be an attempt to extract quick, small settlements from many defendants instead of using the judicial process to protect his copyright against legitimate infringing actors. . . . In this case, Mr. Lantz took a stand against a plaintiff who was using his knowledge and status as a practicing attorney to file meritless suits and to attempt to outmaneuver the legal system.

Bell v. Lantz, No. 1:13-CV-00035-TWP, 2015 WL 3604174, at *2 & *3 (S.D. Ind. June 8, 2015)

After a cursory search, it appears that Mr. Bell has been awarded statutory damages of $40,000 ($2,500 x 16) from default judgments. In Bell v. Lantz, quoted above, Mr. Bell had to pay Mr. Lantz’s attorney’s fees, totaling $33,974.65.

Richard N. Bell v. Find Tickets, LLC

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-00973-JMS-MJD
File Date: Friday, June 19, 2015
Plaintiff: Richard N. Bell
Plaintiff Counsel: Richard N. Bell of Bell Law Firm
Defendant: Find Tickets, LLC
Cause: Copyright Infringement and Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – HRHH Hotel/Casino v. Bella Vita

21 Thursday May 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The Hardrock Hotel and Casino has been hosting a popular daytime party, The Rehab Pool Party, since 2004. Plaintiffs own multiple trademarks referring to daytime parties, and the Rehab name and logo. For the past few years, Bella Vita Lakeside restaurant and bar in Indianapolis has hosted weekly pool parties called “Rehab+ Sundays.” Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s party logo is confusingly similar to Plaintiffs’ owned trademarks. In fact, a local blog claimed “Bella Vita borrowed the “Rehab” theme from the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino.” Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have refused to cease their infringing use and intend to continue to organize and host the “Rehab+ Sundays” pool parties in the Summer of 2015.

HRHH Hotel/Casino LLC et al v. Bella Vita LLC et al

Court Case Number: 1:15-cv-00791-WTL-MJD
File Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Plaintiff: HRHH Hotel/Casino LLC, HRHH IP, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Gregory F. Hahn, Craig E. Pinkus of Bose McKinney & Evans LLP
Defendant: Bella Vita LLC, Henri B. Najem
Cause: False Designation of Origin and Unfair Competition, Trademark Infringement, Dilution, Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge William T. Lawrence
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore