Tag Archives: Richard L. Young

Delta Faucet Company sues Amazon Counterfeiters in Southern District of Indiana

01 Friday Nov 2024

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Delta Faucet Company is once again pursuing counterfeit faucet sellers from Amazon in the Southern District of Indiana. The Complaint (below), always an enjoyable read, discusses how a company’s trademarks are impacted by unauthorized sellers and their negative online reviews. The counterfeiter defendants typically don’t make an appearance in these lawsuits and thus it usually proceeds right to default judgment. The last Delta counterfeiter sued in Indiana earned himself a damages award of $5.4 million and a permanent injunction, so the “head in the sand” strategy is a really bad one. Let’s wait and see if this case is handled any differently.

Stay tuned for updates.

Delta Faucet Company v. Bundrick et al.

Court Case Number: 1:24-cv-01901-RLY-KMB
File Date: October 28, 2024
Plaintiff: Delta Faucet Company
Plaintiff Counsel: Louis T. Perry of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Defendants: Justin Bundrick, Andrew Bundrick, John Does 1-10
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Indiana Crime Victim’s Relief Act
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Kellie M. Barr

Complaint:

Trademark Declaratory Judgment Action filed in Indiana over Protective Trading Card Sleeves

01 Tuesday Oct 2024

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

BCW Diversified, Inc. (“BCW”) is a Middletown, Indiana-based manufacturer of protective card sleeves for collectible trading cards. In this new federal lawsuit filed in the Southern District of Indiana, BCW has filed declaratory judgment complaint against Defendant Ultra PRO International, LLC (“Ultra Pro”). BCW seeks a declaration that Ultra Pro owns no valid, enforceable rights in the following marks: TOPLOADER, PENNY SLEEVES, PRO-BINDER, MINI SNAP, CHROMAFUSION TECHNOLOGY, and DECK VAULT.

Ultra Pro owns U.S. trademark registrations for the disputed trademarks, but BCW asserts that the registrations are invalid. BCW claims that it has used the terms “top loaders,” “penny sleeves,” and “mini-snap” for thirty years in connection with the manufacture, promotion, and sale of protective card sleeves for collectible trading cards. BCW maintains that its use of these terms is not an infringing use because the disputed terms are generic or, at a minimum, merely descriptive of the goods at issue. Allegedly, third parties throughout the industry make wide use of the disputed trademarks in a descriptive fashion.

BCW received cease-and-desist demands from Ultra Pro and a lawsuit was filed against it by Ultra Pro in the Northern District of Illinois in June 2024. Ultra Pro has also filed a lawsuit against 133 of BCW’s retailers.

Stay tuned to see how Ultra Pro responds to this Declaratory Judgment action.

BCW Diversified, Inc. v. Ultra Pro International, LLC

Court Case Number: 1:24-cv-01699-RLY-MJD
File Date: September 30, 2024
Plaintiff: BCW Diversified, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Marc C. Gravino, Joel M. Huotari of WilliamsMcCarthy, LLP
Defendant: Ultra Pro International, LLC
Cause: Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement, Declaratory Judgment of No Dilution, Declaratory Judgment of No Unfair Competition, Declaratory Judgment of Trademark Invalidity
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Mark J. Dinsmore

Complaint:

HIKER vs. HYK OUTDOORS…are you confused?

08 Thursday Aug 2024

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Both parties in this new Indiana trademark lawsuit manufacture “pull-behind” camper trailers. The plaintiff, Hiker Trailers of Columbus, Indiana, has sold trailers using the HIKER TRAILER brand since 2004.

The defendant, Hyk Outdoors, is a Missouri company that has been selling towable camping trailers since 2020.

The goods seem very similar, and presumably so are the parties’ respective consumers. The parties likely have or will promote their trailers at the same trade shows. Ultimately, it will need to be determined whether the trademarks HIKER and HYK OUTDOORS are confusingly similar. Although no specific instances of confusion are cited, the Complaint (below) alleges an admission of repeated consumer confusion by an employee of the defendant.

Stay tuned for updates.

Hiker Industries, LLC v. Hyk Outdoors LLC

Court Case Number: 1:24-cv-01320-RLY-MJD
File Date: August 5, 2024
Plaintiff: Hiker Industries, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: James M. Hinshaw, Brad R. Maurer of Dentons Bingham Greenebaum LLP
Defendant: Hyk Outdoors LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal False Designation of Origin or Sponsorship, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Mark J. Dinsmore

Complaint:

Two Chinese Corporations fight in Indiana Federal Court over Diamond Wall Panels

10 Wednesday Jan 2024

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Happy New Year! Here’s a bit of an oddball case to kick off Indiana intellectual property litigation in 2024. Both parties in this copyright lawsuit are Chinese corporations, but the defendant apparently does business in Indiana. The defendant is alleged to have infringed the plaintiff’s copyright in a “Diamond Tile,” a square or rectangular wall panel having a three-dimensional design formed by various diamond-like elements. The defendant’s sales of the allegedly infringing wall panels took place on Amazon.com.

The Complaint is relatively short, just 4 pages, and has no specifically defined cause, although it seems to be for copyright infringement. We’ll be interested to learn more about the defendant’s relationship with Indiana as the lawsuit progresses. Presumably either the infringing wall panels are manufactured in Indiana or are distributed by Amazon from Indiana.

Here is the plaintiff’s wall panel design:

And here is the defendant’s design:

What do you think? Are the designs substantially similar?

Stay tuned for updates.

Guangzhou Shima Decoration Materials Co., Ltd v. Shenzhen Ruimingxiang Technology Co., Ltd.

Court Case Number: 1:24-cv-00041-RLY-TAB
File Date: January 8, 2024
Plaintiff: Guangzhou Shima Decoration Materials Co., Ltd
Plaintiff Counsel: Michael A. Swift, Harold C. Moore, Travis W. Baxter of Maginot, Moore & Beck, LLP
Defendant: Shenzhen Ruimingxiang Technology Co., Ltd.
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Tim A. Baker

Complaint:

Evansville Software Company sues Ex-Developers and their New Employer over Stolen Software Code

01 Tuesday Nov 2022

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

The plaintiff in this lawsuit, MaddenCo, Inc., is an Evansville, Indiana-based software developer. Specifically, they develop software systems for independent tire dealers and truck stop service centers.

The defendants include two ex-employees of the plaintiff, a software development manager and software developer, who have allegedly developed infringing software code for a competing Louisiana company (also a named defendant) in violation of contractual obligations and fiduciary duties. The plaintiff’s software code has been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

Stay tuned for updates.

MaddenCo Inc. v. Reed et al.

Court Case Number: 3:22-cv-173
File Date: October 31, 2022
Plaintiff: MaddenCo Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Michael T. McNally of Delk McNally LLP
Defendants: James Reed, Dru Darby, HG AutoTech LLC
Cause: Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Tortious Interference, Copyright Infringement, False Advertising, False Representation, False Designation of Origin, Reverse Passing Off, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Unfair Competition, Declaratory Judgment
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Matthew P. Brookman

Complaint: