Tag Archives: Trademark Infringement

Noble Roman’s sues Ex-Franchisee for Unpaid Royalties, Underreported Sales Figures

09 Wednesday Jun 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Noble Roman’s is becoming a regular on this blog. It begs the question, why do they have so many intellectual property problems? Rather than dumping piles of money into back-end enforcement, perhaps they should spend more time on front-end due diligence and avoid many of these problems altogether. Given that most/all of the lawsuits involve ex-franchisees, perhaps Noble Roman’s should re-examine their franchise agreement or franchisee selection process. At least this lawsuit leaves out the ridiculous abandoned theft and conversion claims from their previous complaints.

As with most of their previous lawsuits, Noble Roman’s is suing a prior franchisee for breach of their franchise agreement. Here, the Defendants, with gas station locations in Florida and Georgia, have allegedly not paid the required royalty, underreported sales figures, failed to make available all Noble Roman’s menu items, failed to maintain required business hours, and sold non-Noble Roman’s food offerings.

The Complaint was originally filed in Marion County Superior Circuit Court for Marion County, Indiana but Defendants’ counsel has filed a Notice of Removal to the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Defendants’ counsel is Donald E. Pinaud, Jr. of Jacksonville, Florida.

Stay tuned for updates.

Noble’s Roman’s, Inc. v. AMI Stores Management, Inc. et al.

Case Number: 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB
File Date: Sunday, June 6, 2021
Plaintiff: Noble Roman’s, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Jaime L. Meyer, Jeffrey D. Roberts of Hollingsworth Roberts Means LLC
Defendant: AMI Stores Management, Inc., AMI 57 LLC d/b/a AMI 70 Food Mart, AMI 63 LLC d/b/a AMI 63 Food Mart
Cause: Breach of Franchise Agreement, Trademark Infringement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Tim A. Baker

Complaint:

Monster Energy sues Fitness Equipment Company over Claw Icon

28 Friday May 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

This is the second lawsuit filed by an energy drink company in a week!

The Plaintiff, Monster Energy Company, brings this lawsuit after several years of unsuccessful direct communications with the Defendant attempting to seek voluntary compliance with their asserted trademark rights.

Anybody who’s been to a gas station or watched the X Games will recognize the Monster “Claw Icon” logo, an “M-shaped claw design with jagged or irregular contours designed to evoke a claw having torn through the can or other material.” The Complaint (below) claims that Monster brand drinks are the best-selling energy drink in the United States. In October 2020, Monster was named the 4th Most Marketed Brand in Sports.

The Defendant, Bear KompleX, sells fitness equipment such as hand grips, weight belts, compression sleeves, and weight belts. They utilize a “Bear Claw” logo (not the donut) which looks like a slash (not the rocker) from a five-fingered bear paw. Bear KompleX’s logo often appears in various colors, including sometimes green and black.

Monster first contacted Bear KompleX in August 2019 demanding that they stop selling a “Grip, Calicure, & Doc Spartan Monster Bundle.” Later that month, Monster sent another letter warning Bear KompleX not to use a green claw mark. The Defendant apparently responded over the subsequent year by expanding its product offerings bearing a green claw mark, seemingly taunting Monster to take legal action.

That legal action has now been taken by Monster, and I’ll be looking forward to seeing Bear KompleX’s Answer. The Complaint asserts only a likelihood of confusion and no actual instances of confusion, so we can expect the Defendant to argue against any likelihood of confusion. They can point to differences between the logos, such as the Bear KompleX logo having five slashes, versus Monster’s three, and their bear claw facing upward rather than downward.

Stay tuned for updates.

Monster Energy Company v. R&R Medical, LLC d/b/a Bear KompleX

Case Number: 2:21-cv-00179-PPS-JPK
File Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2021
Plaintiff: Monster Energy Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: James W. Riley, Jr., Jaclyn M. Flint of Riley Bennett Egloff LLP
Defendant: R&R Medical d/b/a Bear KompleX
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Trade Dress Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Federal Dilution, State Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Philip P. Simon
Referred To: Joshua P. Kolar

Complaint:

Energy Drink Company Sues Automotive Repair Company for Trademark Infringement

24 Monday May 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Evansville, Indiana-based Full Throttle Automotive, an auto repair shop, is being sued for trademark infringement by Energy Beverages, producer of Full Throttle energy drinks. The Complaint (below) highlights Energy Beverages’ long history of advertising in auto racing, including being the title sponsor of the National Hot Rod Association’s primary drag racing event.

The auto repair shop has also sponsored vehicles in motorsport events. Energy Beverages sent a cease-and-desist letter in October 2020, but Full Throttle Automotive has refused to discontinue use of its trademark.

Stay tuned for the Answer in the next few weeks, when we’ll likely find out how long Full Throttle Automotive has been using their “Full Throttle” name. They posted their current name and logo on Facebook back in 2014, and it’s likely they were using their name even before that, so they may have a strong acquiescence or laches defense based on many years of inaction from Energy Beverages.

A possible outcome could be a compromise whereby Full Throttle Automotive agrees not to sponsor NHRA events, presumably the most likely source of consumer confusion.

Energy Beverages LLC v. Full Throttle Automotive LLC

Case Number: 3:21-cv-00081-RLY-MPB
File Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021
Plaintiff: Energy Beverages LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: James W. Riley, Jr., Jaclyn M. Flint of Riley Bennett Egloff LLP
Defendant: Full Throttle Automotive LLC
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Trade Dress Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Richard L. Young
Referred To: Matthew P. Brookman

Complaint:

Noble Roman’s sues Ex-Franchisees for Trademark Infringement, Conversion, Theft

08 Monday Feb 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

The Defendants in this lawsuit are allegedly ex-franchisees of Noble’s Romans, selling gas station pizza from numerous “Luke” gas stations across Northern Indiana.

The Defendants are alleged to have continued utilizing Noble Roman’s intellectual property to advertise and sell Noble Roman’s-branded products and services after termination of their franchise agreement. Further, the Complaint alleges that the Defendants sold unauthorized “Noble Roman’s” products from at least one non-franchised location (see Complaint below, Section 22), but that location is not specifically identified.

The lawsuit was originally filed by Noble Roman’s counsel in Marion County Superior Court in October 2020 but has now been removed to the Southern District of Indiana.

There are often widely-conflicting viewpoints when such franchise arrangements go south, so stay tuned for the Defendant’s Answer and their side of this story.

Noble Roman’s Inc. v. Gateway Triangle Corp. et al.

Court Case Number: 1:21-cv-00407-JPH-TAB
File Date: February 5, 2021 (via Notice of Removal)
Plaintiff: Noble Romans, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: P. Adam Davis, Esquire of Davis & Sarbinoff, LLC
Defendant: Gateway Triangle Corp., 7405 Indy Corp., 850 Indy Corp., Northlake Marketing LLC, Thomas M. Collins II
Cause: Conversion under Indiana Code § 35-43-4-3, Theft under Indiana Code §35-43-4-2, Breach of Franchise Agreement, Trademark Infringement, Unjust Enrichment
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: James Patrick Hanlon
Referred To: Tim A. Baker

Complaint:

Mobile App Developer sued for Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting

21 Thursday Jan 2021

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The Plaintiff in this lawsuit, Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), operates one of the world’s largest energy markets with more than $29 billion in annual gross market energy transactions. MISO provides power to 15 U.S. states and Manitoba.

The Defendant, an individual, is alleged to have created a mobile application called “Midcontinent ISO with Realtime Dashboard” that infringes MISO’s trademarks and misleads the consuming public that MISO produced or approves of the application. The Complaint also raises a concern that users are being tricked into entering legitimate MISO credentials into the non-endorsed application.

The purpose of the mobile application is unclear from the Complaint, but it seems to provide information about Plaintiff’s services, tracking energy rates and the status of the power grid. As such, perhaps the Defendant can articulate a “nominative fair use” defense, if use of the Plaintiff’s trademark was necessary to identify the Plaintiff’s products or services, and the Plaintiff’s trademarks weren’t used to suggest endorsement. However, the Defendant’s app also prominently featured Plaintiff’s design mark, which could undermine any fair use defense.

A review of Defendant’s Google Play store shows that they offer similar apps for other energy providers, including NYISO:

The Google Play listing and the app photos don’t contain the usual disclaimers that you’d want to see to best support a “nominative fair use” defense. The Midcontinent ISO application was removed from the Google Play store on January 11, 2021 and remains down today. The Complaint requests injunctive relief to prevent a future relaunch of the application.

Stay tuned for updates.

Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. v. Sullivan

Court Case Number: 1:21-cv-00143-JRS-DML
File Date: January 18, 2021
Plaintiff: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Kevin W. Kirsch, David A. Mancino, Kevin P. Flynn of Baker & Hostetler LLP
Defendant: James F. Sullivan a.k.a. Jim Cassidy
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: James R. Sweeney II
Referred To: Debra McVicker Lynch

Complaint: