Tag Archives: Tanya Walton Pratt

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:

Fireworks involved in first Indiana Trademark Lawsuit of 2023

10 Tuesday Jan 2023

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Happy New Year! It didn’t take long to get the first Indiana trademark (and trade dress) lawsuit of 2023, and in continuation of the festive celebrations, it involves fireworks.

The Defendants are alleged to be selling fireworks that infringe the Plaintiff’s registered TIKI, GHOST, and XL trademarks, as well as a “Tiki Trade Dress”.

The parties seem to be all major players in the fireworks industry, so they likely have some history. The Plaintiff has registered trademarks and it seems that the Defendants introduced new competing products utilizing similar marks after the registration date. As always, the Defendants’ Answer may tell another side of the story so stay tuned for updates.

1.4G Holdings, LLC v. North Central Industries, Inc. et al.

Court Case Number: 1:23-cv-00037-TWP-MG
File Date: January 5, 2023
Plaintiff: 1.4G Holdings, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Philip R. Zimmerly of Bose McKinney & Evans LLP
Defendants: North Central Industries, Inc., Great Grizzly, Inc., R.Brown, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Trade Dress Infringement, Misappropriation
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Mario Garcia

Complaint:

Microsoft sues in Indiana over Phony Tech Support Schemes

28 Monday Feb 2022

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Nearly seven out of ten Americans have encountered a technical support scam in the previous twelve months. Approximately ten percent of those respondents lost money from such scams. That’s not cool.

Microsoft is attempting to crack down on phony Microsoft support scams, in this particular instance focusing on a New Jersey individual operating a shell Indiana company called “Think Global.” The Complaint (below) details the scam and an interaction between Microsoft’s agent (presumably an attorney or technical investigator) and the alleged scammer(s).

The Complaint names an individual, a Mount Laurel, New Jersey resident (the sole member of the Indiana company), so perhaps there will be some justice for all the scammed individuals.

Stay tuned for updates.

Microsoft Corporation v. Solution Hat, LLC d/b/a Think Global et al.

Case Number: 1:22-cv-00396-TWP-TAB
File Date: February 25, 2022
Plaintiff: Microsoft Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: Jeff M. Barron of Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Bonnie MacNaughton, Meagan Himes of David Wright Tremaine LLP
Defendant: Solution Hat, LLC d/b/a/ Think Global et al,
Cause: Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act, Telemarketing Sales Rule, Trademark Infringement, False Advertising, False Designation of Origin, Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, Cybersquatting
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Tim A. Baker

Complaint:

Indianapolis Mexican Restaurant sued for Piracy over 2018 Alvarez v. Fielding Boxing Match

16 Thursday Dec 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Here’s more support for a copyright small claims court. Indianapolis-based Mexican restaurant La Jalisco is being sued for copyright infringement and piracy after allegedly showing (without authorization, obviously) a Canelo Alvarez vs. Rocky Fielding boxing match in their west-side restaurant on December 15, 2018.

For non-boxing fans, Alvarez is currently ESPN.com’s #1 “Pound-for-Pound” boxer (for comparison, the legendary “Gypsy King” Tyson Fury ranks #5). So, while 3 years ago, it was a big Saturday night fight.

Consider what a restaurant has to pay to properly show a fight. A few hundred dollars at most, probably closer to one hundred, and definitely less than the $600 filing fee for a federal lawsuit. Certainly less than the $150,000 statutory damages sought by the plaintiff. The Complaint (below) doesn’t reference any settlement communications between the parties, but you have to think that the defendants were given an opportunity to settle by paying a reasonable license fee at one point.

On the other hand, if La Jalisco didn’t show the fight, they didn’t show the fight. There are usually two sides to every story, so stay tuned for the Defendants’ response.

Innovative Sports Management Inc. v. La Jalisco LLP

Case Number: 1:21-cv-03040-TWP-MG
File Date: Wednesday, December 15, 2021
Plaintiff: Innovative Sports Management Inc., d/b/a Integrated Sports Media
Plaintiff Counsel: Ryan R. Janis of Jekielek & Janis LLP
Defendant: La Jalisco LLP d/b/a Taqueria Jalisco a/k/a Jalisco Restaurant Bar, Joan Brito, Victoria A. Morales
Cause: Satellite and Cable Piracy, Copyright Infringement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Mario Garcia

Complaint:

Painter sues T-Shirt Printing Website for Unauthorized Use of Presidential Painting

27 Monday Sep 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

This copyright lawsuit involves a painter attempting to stop an online merchandise platform from using his artwork on customizable products. The Defendant t-shirt website, like thousands of other sites, sells blank apparel that can be customized with a user-uploaded image or text.

Per the Complaint (below), the John Doe defendants (1-11) have, via separate registered accounts, been uploading a digital copy of one of Plaintiff’s paintings since 2018 and using the online platform to create unauthorized products which they presumably then sell elsewhere. Plaintiff’s counsel first contacted the Defendant website in April 2020 about the unauthorized use of Plaintiff’s artwork, seemingly with no acceptable resolution or cessation.

In lawsuits such as this with numerous John Doe defendants, the first and most difficult hurdle for the Plaintiff will be to discover the identity of the John Does. The similarity in the John Doe’s account names on the t-shirt platform seem to indicate that it’s just one source (an individual or small group) that is repeatedly ordering new product. I wouldn’t expect any response to be filed by the John Doe Defendants, who will likely disappear altogether, and probably a long road of discovery for the Plaintiff perhaps eventually leading to a default judgment against the determined “guilty” party.

The vicarious infringement and contributory infringement claims against the online t-shirt website will be interesting to follow. Presumably, having been put on notice of the unauthorized use in April 2020, the t-shirt website might be expected to take more action to prevent future infringements of the same image. But how closely do they (or should they be expected to) patrol user-submitted images for infringement? It seems like the t-shirt printing and shipping process would be almost completely automated following the user submission, with no copyright verification step in between.

Stay tuned for updates.

Thomas v. ooShirts, Inc. et al.

Case Number: 1:21-cv-02519-TWP-MJD
File Date: Friday, September 24, 2021
Plaintiff: Andrew “Andy” Thomas
Plaintiff Counsel: Sean J. Quinn of SouthBank Legal: LaDue | Curran | Kuehn, Oliver Maguire of Evans & Dixon, LLC
Defendant: ooShirts, Inc., John Does 1-11
Cause: Direct Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Infringement, Contributory Infringement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Mark J. Dinsmore

Complaint: