Oregon State Bar Intellectual Property Section Social this Thursday

Tags

July Happy Hour on the Water!

Join your colleagues for a social and networking get-together on the Oregon Maritime Museum Sternwheeler on the Willamette River.

SPONSORED BY:   SCHWABE, WILLIAMSON & WYATT; STOLL BERNE; and KOLISCH HARTWELL

WHEN: Thursday, July 17, 2014, 5-7 p.m.

WHERE:   Oregon Maritime Museum, On the Willamette River, Waterfront Park, SW Naito Parkway at Pine St, Portland, 503-224-7724,http://www.oregonmaritimemuseum.org/index.html

A variety of appetizers will be served, courtesy of the IP Section.  Beer, wine, and non-alcoholic beverages will be available.  Come to network, compare notes, give us feedback on desired CLE topics for the future, and enjoy some great food and sun on the deck of the sternwheeler.

Please RSVP to Allen Field – allen@allenfieldlaw.com, 503-789-5533.

Screen Shot 2014-07-14 at 2.36.06 PM

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – AutoBidMaster v. Alpine Auto Gallery et al

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Plaintiff operates an online auction marketplace at the domain autobidmaster.com. Defendant, a competitor, began using the domain autobidmaser.com and autobidmater.com to redirect traffic to its own website.

AutoBidMaster LLC v. Alpine Auto Gallery LLC et al

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-01083
File Date: Monday, July 07, 2014
Plaintiff: AutoBidMaster LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Nathaniel L. Funk of Barker Martin PS
Defendant: Alpine Auto Gallery LLC, Vehiko LLC, Edward Agabs, John Does 1-5
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Trademark Dilution, Federal Cyberpiracy, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Unjust Enrichment, Action to Pierce Corporate Veil
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: John V. Acosta

 

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – B.C. Marketing Concepts v. The Sessions Law Firm

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Session, Sessions LawHere’s yet another trademark lawsuit involving a brewery. This time, however, the defendant isn’t another brewery but a DUI attorney using an allegedly confusingly similar logo.

Plaintiff B. C. Marketing, Inc. is an Oregon corporation based in Hood River, Oregon. Plaintiff does business as Full Sail Brewing Company. Since at least as early as 2005, Plaintiff has been selling beer under the trademark SESSION, including a distinctive shield logo trademark.

Defendant is an Atlanta, Georgia-based DUI attorney that has been using a similar logo to promote his legal services to “beer drinkers.”

Take a look at the two logos. Confusingly similar? Note that Defendant has been using the logo on paper bags “designed and distributed for the express purpose of holding a can or bottle of beer.” (See image in Complaint below.) While this may have seemed like a cute marketing idea at the time, surely the Defendant can’t be so invested in his logo as to justify litigation in federal court. I expect this lawsuit will be resolved fairly quickly…stay tuned for updates.

B.C. Marketing Concepts Inc. v. The Sessions Law Firm LLC

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-01087
File Date: Tuesday, July 08, 2014
Plaintiff: B.C. Marketing Concepts Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Charles H. DeVoe, Thomas J. Romano of Kolisch Hartwell PC
Defendant: The Sessions Law Firm LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, State Trademark Infringement, State Unfair Competition, State Trademark Dilution, State Law Product Disparagement, Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael H. Simon

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Pacific Wood Ventures v. Abby Ghiassy et al

Tags

, , ,

Plaintiff, based in Bend, Oregon, alleges that Defendant, based in Corvallis, Oregon, is using renderings and text from Plaintiff’s website on Defendant’s website without authorization.

Pacific Wood Ventures LLC v. Abby Ghiassy et al

Court Case Number: 6:14-cv-01029-MC
File Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014
Plaintiff: Pacific Wood Ventures LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Leonard D. DuBoff of The DuBoff Law Group PC
Defendant: Abby Ghiassy, Genesis Marketing LLC
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael J. McShane

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Leatherman Tool Group v. Gogotech II

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Leatherman Tool Group, an Oregon corporation, manufactures and distributes engineered multi-tools, pocket tools, and knives that are designed for outdoor, tactical, professional, and general use. Leatherman promotes and sells its products to consumers directly both online at leatherman.com, as well as in its retail store, The Leatherman Store, located in Portland, Oregon.

Leatherman is the owner of multiple federal trademark registrations for LEATHERMAN.

Defendant, a New York corporation, operates factoryoutletstore.com, an online retail site that sells multi-tools, pocket tools and knives that are manufactured by Leatherman.

Defendant is neither an authorized distributor nor an authorized reseller of Leatherman’s products, hence the lawsuit.

Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. v. Gogotech II, LLC

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00920
File Date: Friday, June 06, 2014
Plaintiff: Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stuart R. Dunwoody, Kaley L. Fendall, John F. McGrory Jr. of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Defendant: Gogotech II, LLC
Cause: Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, False Advertising, Common Law Unfair Competition, Breach of Contract
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Paul Papak

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Mackenzie Architecture v. Mackenzie Engineering

Tags

, , , , , ,

For nearly a decade, Plaintiff and Defendants were able to coexist using their respective marks, MACKENZIE ARCHITECTURE and GROUP MACKENZIE. Around August 2013, Defendants dropped GROUP from the mark GROUP MACKENZIE and began operating under the mark MACKENZIE alone. Both entities are located in Portland, Oregon and provide architecture services.

Mackenzie Architecture Inc. v. Mackenzie Engineering Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00886-AA
File Date: Monday, June 02, 2014
Plaintiff: Mackenzie Architecture Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Kevin M. Hayes of Klarquist Sparkman LLP
Defendant: Mackenzie Engineering Inc., Group Mackenzie Incorporated Architecture Planning & Interior Designs
Cause: Unfair Competition, Trademark Infringement, Improper Amendment, Improper Ownership
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken

 

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Sleash v. One Pet Planet et al

Tags

, , , , ,

Sleash, LLC v. One Pet Planet, LLC et al

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00863-ST
File Date: Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Plaintiff: Sleash, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Johnathan E. Mansfield of MansfieldLaw
Defendant: One Pet Planet, LLC, Amazing Pet Products, Choo Choo Imports LLC
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Contributory Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – iovation v. IOvations

Tags

, , , , , ,

Plaintiff iovation, based in Portland, Oregon, sells computer security and fraud prevention services to customers internationally. Plaintiff has used the term IOVATION as a trade name and trademark since at least as early as June 1, 2004.iovation Screen Shot

Defendant IOvations, of Massachusetts, was organized on July 12, 2004. According to the Complaint, IOvations first limited the services it offered under the IOVATIONS mark to digital data storage solutions. More recently, IOvations has expanded the services it offers under the mark to include computer “network and security solutions.”

Given the similarity, both visually and aurally, between the IOVATION and IOVATIONS trademarks, the closely-related goods and services that the parties sell, and the parties’ overlapping channels of trade and classes of consumers, Plaintiff alleges that actual confusion between the parties and their respective marks is likely to continue and increase.

Failure to negotiate mutually-agreeable terms of coexistence led to this lawsuit.

iovation, Inc. v. IOvations, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00838
File Date: Thursday, May 22, 2014
Plaintiff: iovation, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stuart R. Dunwoody of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Defendant: IOvations, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Paul Papak

 

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Leatherman Tool Group v. Armitage Hardware and Building Supply

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Leatherman Tool Group, an Oregon corporation, manufactures and distributes engineered multi-tools, pocket tools, and knives that are designed for outdoor, tactical, professional, and general use. Leatherman promotes and sells its products to consumers directly both online at leatherman.com, as well as in its retail store, The Leatherman Store, located in Portland, Oregon.

Leatherman is the owner of multiple federal trademark registrations for LEATHERMAN.

800px-Leatherman_Super_Tool_OpenDefendant, an Illinois corporation, owns and operates both Armitage Direct and leathermantool.com, an online retail site that sells multi-tools, pocket tools and knives that are manufactured by Leatherman.

Defendant is neither an authorized distributor nor an authorized reseller of Leatherman’s products, hence the lawsuit.

Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. v. Armitage Hardware and Building Supply, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00823-MO
File Date: Monday, May 19, 2014
Plaintiff: Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Kaley L. Fendall, John F. McGrory Jr. of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Defendant: Armitage Hardware and Building Supply, Inc.
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Cybersquatting, Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael W. Mosman

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Too Marker Products v. Alvin and Company

Tags

, , , , ,

RegistrationPlaintiff manufactures and sells high-end markers for illustrators and design professionals. Their markers have distinctive squarish bodies and distinctive squarish cap-ends, both protected by U.S. trademark registrations.

This lawsuit arises because the configuration of Defendant’s Heritage A-Line markers is alleged to be confusingly similar to the configuration denoted in the trademark registrations and the configuration of Plaintiffs’ COPIC line of markers.

Too Marker Products, Inc. et al v. Alvin and Company, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00773-AC
File Date: Friday, May 09, 2014
Plaintiff: Too Marker Products, Inc., Imagination International, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Timothy S. DeJong, Jacob S. Gill of Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Schlachter PC
Defendant: Alvin and Company, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.