Tag Archives: Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Breach of Contract over Moisturizing Personal Lubricant Leads to Lawsuit

06 Monday Nov 2017

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The Plaintiff, a Eugene, Oregon-based manufacturer of natural and organic intimacy and feminine hygiene products, “brings this action because Defendants have conspired to sabotage [Plaintiff]’s distribution in Canada, and then to use [Plaintiff]’s proprietary, confidential business information and intellectual property to launch a brand of products nearly identical to those marketed and sold by [Plaintiff].”

Plaintiff sells moisturizing personal lubricant products under the brand names RESTORE, ALMOST NAKED and GUILTY PLEASURE.

The dispute arises from a contractual relationship gone bad. See the Complaint (below) for the details.

Good Clean Love, Inc. v. Aurium Pharma Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 6:17-cv-01712-JR
File Date: October 26, 2017
Plaintiff: Good Clean Love, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David P. Cooper, Owen W. Dukelow, Desmond J. Kidney of Kolisch Hartwell, P.C.
Defendants: Aurium Pharma Inc., Rowland Global LLC, Edward Rowland
Causes: Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Breach of Contract, Intentional Interference with Economic Relations, Unlawful Business Practices, Unlawful Trade Practices, Breach of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Professional Negligence
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Jolie A. Russo

Complaint:

Chinese Scientist Accused of Misappropriating Cow Feed Technology

17 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

OmniGen Research, LLC et al v. Wang et al

Court Case Number: 6:2016-cv-00268
File Date: Monday, February 15, 2016
Plaintiff: Omnigen Research, LLC, Prince Agri Products, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Klaus H. Hamm, Scott E. Davis of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP
Defendant: YongQiang Wang, Yan Zheng, Bioshen
Cause: Breach of Contract, Intentional Interference with Economic Relations, Trade Secret Misappropriation, Copyright Infringement, False Advertising, Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael J. McShane

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Nike v. Ho et al

29 Tuesday Apr 2014

Posted by in District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Defendants Yamaguchi and Ho are alleged to have used their position as managers at Nike to steal unique and/or custom athletic footwear in order to profit from the sale of those shoes to collectors of rare athletic shoes, known in the industry as “Sneakerheads.” These defendants allegedly lied to Nike and its manufacturers by misrepresenting that the shoes would be used for promotional and marketing purposes in order to trick them into manufacturing inventory for the illicit scheme. Defendant Keating allegedly acted as the middle-man in the unlawful enterprise by knowingly purchasing and re-selling the stolen footwear obtained by Yamaguchi and Ho.

Nike brings this action to recover the stolen shoes, recover the illicit gains obtained by Defendants from the sale of the stolen goods, to obtain an injunction preventing Defendants from continuing to participate in the illicit sale of stolen Nike goods, and to seek an award of punitive damages.

Nike Swoosh Registration

 

Nike Inc. v. Tung Wing Ho et al

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00696-MO
File Date: Monday, April 28, 2014
Plaintiff: Nike Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Paul H. Trinchero, Robert C. Weaver Jr. of Garvey Schubert Barer
Defendant: Tung Wing Ho, Denise Wei-Ching Yee, Kyle Keoki Yamaguchi, Shu-Chu Yamaguchi, Jason M. Keating
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Conversion, Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Breach of Contract
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael W. Mosman

Oregon Trade Secret Litigation Update – Sockeye Timberframing v. Surface Theory

22 Tuesday Apr 2014

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trade Secret

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Plaintiff, an Oregon LLC having its principal place of business in McMinnville with a show room in Portland, is a domestic supplier of recaptured antique wood. Plaintiff acquires recaptured antique wood from old barns, buildings and derelict warehouses, then resaws the wood and repurposes it into flooring and similar building materials. Plaintiff operates under the assumed business names of Pioneer Millworks and New Energy Works.

Pioneer ScreenIn August 2010, Plaintiff hired Defendant Burtness and gave him access to confidential business information and trade secrets, including Plaintiff’s client lists, wholesale price lists, contact information for suppliers of reclaimed antique wood, business marketing plans, methods and means of resawing reclaimed antique wood, and Plaintiff’s financial information.

In the middle of 2012, while still employed by Plaintiff, Defendant Burtness allegedly launched a competing company under the name “Surface Theory.” Upon leaving Plaintiff’s employ in November 2013, Surface Theory allegedly posted several of Plaintiff’s photographs on a website, along with a list of Plaintiff’s clients and projects. Defendant Burtness and Surface Theory are accused of misappropriating Plaintiff’s trade secrets to obtain a competitive advantage.

Businesses, this lawsuit should serve as a warning to have your employees sign all necessary confidentiality, non-solicitation and non-compete agreements PRIOR to sharing your valuable trade secrets. Another common avoidable mistake in this lawsuit was to allow a salesman to use his personal cell phone as his client contact number, rather than a business number.

Sockeye Timberframing LLC v. Surface Theory LLC et al

Court Case Number: 3:14-cv-00649
File Date: Friday, April 18, 2014
Plaintiff: Sockeye Timberframing LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Travis W. Hall of Bateman Seidel Miner Blomgren Chellis & Gram PC
Defendant: Surface Theory LLC, Ross Burtness
Cause: Copyright Infringement, Work Made For Hire, Lanham Act Violations, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Trade Secret Violations, Intentional Interference with Economic Relations
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael W. Mosman

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Idylwilde v. Umpqua Feather Merchants

13 Wednesday Nov 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Portland-based Idylwilde designs, manufactures, markets, brands, and sells flies for the global fly fishing industry. According to the Complaint, “Idylwilde sells to a very sophisticated buyer of flies where the stylized portrayal of insect species, sex, and maturity level of the hatch make a difference the customer is willing to pay for based on the fly designer’s style.”

The Complaint is long but it has a little bit of everything so it’s worth a read. This will be an interesting case to monitor.

Idylwilde, Inc. et al v. Umpqua Feather Merchants, LLC et al

Court Case Number: 3:13-cv-02009-HZ
File Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Plaintiff: Idylwilde, Inc., Zach Mertens
Plaintiff Counsel: Katherine R. Heekin of The Heekin Law Firm
Defendant: Umpqua Feather Merchants, LLC, Mirabel, Inc., Bien Tan, Does 1 through 10, Inclusive
Cause: Trade Dress Infringement, Federal False Designation of Origin, and Unfair Competition, Trademark and Trade Dress Dilution, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Misappropriation of Trade Secrets, Intentional Interference with Contracts and Prospective Economic Advantage, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Conversion, Unjust Enrichment, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Marco A. Hernandez