• About
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer
  • Oregon IP Resources

Oregon Intellectual Property Blog

Oregon Intellectual Property Blog

Tag Archives: Federal Trademark Infringement

prAna vs. apana…are you confused?

12 Thursday Jul 2018

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law False Advertising, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Oregon Unfair Trade Practices Act, Unfair Trade Practices, Unjust Enrichment, Yoga, Youlee Yim You

The Plaintiff in this trademark lawsuit sells “sustainable clothing for yoga, travel, and outdoor adventure enthusiasts” using the PRANA word mark and logo. The PRANA trademark has been used since as early as 1992, and even this non-yogi is aware of the well-known brand.

The Defendants are accused of selling yoga apparel under the confusingly similar name “apana,” coupled with a logo that Plaintiff feels is confusingly similar to prAna’s distinctive logo design.

Here are the trademarks…you be the judge:

Of course, we’re dealing with yoga, so the Complaint was bound to get a little weird:

“Like “prana,” “apana” is also well-known to those who practice yoga, and is closely related as the balancing vayu to the prana-vayu. It is situated in the pelvic floor, and reflects energy that moves downwards and outwards.” “prana and apana are opposing, yet balanced forces. Where ‘prana’ regulates the intake of particles and energy, ‘apana’ is responsible for the elimination of the unabsorbed residues.” Assuming regular yoga folks know all this, wouldn’t that be an argument against confusion?

What do you think…are the trademarks confusingly similar? Sound off in the comments below and stay tuned for updates. This one could get interesting.

prAna Living, LLC v. IFG Corp. et al.

Court Case Number: 3:18-cv-01174-YY
File Date: Monday, July 2, 2018
Plaintiff: prAna Living, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Nicolas F. Aldrich, Angela E. Addae of Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, P.C.
Defendant: IFG Corp., Adjmi Apparel Group LLC
Causes: Federal Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law False Advertising, Common Law Unfair Competition, Unfair Trade Practices, Unjust Enrichment
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Youlee Yim You

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Hydro Flask sues numerous counterfeiters, seeks Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction

09 Monday Jul 2018

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Federal Anti-Cybersquatting, Federal False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Michael H. Simon

The Plaintiff in this trademark lawsuit, Helen of Troy Limited, is the owner of the immensely popular HYDRO FLASK trademark, used in connection with vacuum insulated stainless steel water bottles and other insulated products. Helen of Troy’s affiliate Steel Technology, LLC d/b/a Hydro Flask, an Oregon limited liability company with headquarters in Bend, Oregon, founded the HYDRO FLASK brand and product line in 2009 and today is the North American marketer and distributor of HYDRO FLASK-branded products. What Pacific Northwesterner doesn’t own at least one Hydro Flask for their weekend hiking (or brewery-visiting) adventures?

Numerous defendants, some perhaps related, are accused of selling counterfeit Hydro Flask products via counterfeit websites. Given the evidence presented in the voluminous Complaint and Exhibits (see below), the counterfeiting seems fairly apparent. The Plaintiff has filed a subsequent Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, likely the best way to deal with multiple infringing (and non-responsive) websites.

If the counterfeiting wasn’t obvious and there was any question whether the Defendants were fighting an uphill battle, the Plaintiff’s lead attorney, Mrs. Benedick, previously served as a Judicial Extern for the presiding judge, Michael Simon. 

The Complaint’s Exhibit List is extensive and voluminous, with Exhibit 5 perhaps taking the record for the largest ever Exhibit logged by this blog, at a gargantuan 633 “never mind the PACER charges” pages.

This lawsuit will likely be a one-sided battle, with excellent high-value legal work on behalf of the Plaintiff and probably no response from the Defendants. However, if the end result is numerous injunctions and a (brief) stop to Hydro Flask counterfeiting, Plaintiff can be satisfied, at least for awhile.

Stay tuned for updates.

Helen of Troy Limited v. Bestcupshop.com et al

Court Case Number: 3:18-cv-01165-SI
File Date: Friday, June 29, 2018
Plaintiff: Helen of Troy Limited
Plaintiff Counsel: Kenneth R. Davis II, Kelsey M. Benedick of Lane Powell PC, David J. Stewart, Mary Grace Gallagher of Alston & Bird LLP
Defendant: BESTCUPSHOP.COM, BESTCUPSSALE.COM; BOMOSFIT.COM; CAMOGYM.COM; CHEAPERBOTTLE.COM; CHEAPHYDROFLASK.COM; CHENJIAJIN D/B/A HYDROFLASKEN.COM; DEALHYDRO.COM; FANACTICSCUP.COM; FENGZHU E- COMMERCEHOLDINGS LLC; GUO TANG D/B/A HYDROFLASKOUTLET.COM; HFTUMBLERS.COM; HOU SU PING D/B/A EFOAQ.COM; HUA SHUNG HU D/B/A FINYP.COM; HYDROASK.COM; HYDROEFLASK.COM; HYDROFLASKC.COM; HYDROFLASKCUP.COM; HYDROFLASKCUPS.COM; HYDROFLASKDEAL.COM; HYDROFLASKDEALS.COM; HYDROFLASKI.COM; HYDROFLASKOFFICIAL.COM; HYDROFLASKSALE.COM; HYDROFLASKSALES.COM; HYDROFLASKSELL.COM; HYDROFLASKSHOPUS.COM; HYDROFLASKSTORE.COM; HYDROFLASKTUMBLER.COM; HYDROFLASKUS.COM; HYDROFLSAK.COM; HYDROOFLASK.COM; HYDROSFLASK.COM; IEKASHOP.COM; CUPSDEAL.COM; JIMMY LI (D/B/A CUPSTOREONLINE.COM, FLASKHYDRO.COM, FLASK- HYDRO.COM, FLASK-HYDRO- FLASK.COM, HYDROCUPFLASK.COM, HYDROFLASK-BOTTLES.COM, HYDRO- FLASK-BOTTLES.COM, HYDROFLASKBOTTLES.STORE, HYDROFLASK-CUP.COM, HYDROFLASKHYDRATION.COM, HYDROFLASK-OFFICIAL.COM, HYDROFLASKOFFICIALSTORE.COM); JINKUN CHEN D/B/A JACKETGOOSE.COM; KEAOUTLET.COM; LI CHAOQUN (D/B/A HYDROFLASK.BIZ, HYDROFLASKCHEAP.COM, HYDROFLASKCOFFEE.COM. HYDRO- FLASK-CUP.COM, HYDROFLASKFORSALE.COM, HYDRO- FLASK-SHOP.COM, HYDRO-FLASK- STORE.COM, HYDROFLASKTUMBLERS.COM, XHYDROFLASK.COM); LIFEIDA ELECTRONIC BUSSINESS CO., LTD; MEILIAN LLC; MIERFITNESS.COM; NANCHANG LANJUNDE INDUSTRIA CO.; OFFICIALCUPSTORE.COM; OFFICIALHYDROFLASK.COM
Causes: Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting, False Designation of Origin, Federal Unfair Competition, Violation of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael H. Simon

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction:

View this document on Scribd

 

Insurer sues for infringement of RED SHIELD trademark

02 Monday Jul 2018

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, John V. Acosta, State Trademark Infringement

Plaintiff has offered insurance under the trademark RED SHIELD since 1979.

The Defendant, previously known as Red Auto Administration Inc. apparently switched its name to Red Shield Administration in 2018, using a RED SHIELD trademark in connection with service contracts/vehicle “protection plans.”

Plaintiff alleges some fairly significant instances of consumer confusion, including a litigation threat from an attorney and a complaint from the State of California Department of Insurance

Red Shield Insurance Company v. Red Shield Administration, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:18-cv-01159-AC
File Date: Friday,June 29, 2018
Plaintiff: Red Shield Insurance Company
Plaintiff Counsel: Kevin M. Hayes, Jeffrey S. Love of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP
Defendant: Red Shield Administration, Inc.
Causes: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Oregon State Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: John V. Acosta

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Pacific Fence & Wire Company files lawsuit against Pacific NW Fence & Deck over use of PACIFIC trademark

27 Wednesday Jun 2018

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Dilution, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Paul Papak

Plaintiff Pacific Fence & Wire Company, an Oregon corporation based in Clackamas, Oregon, has used its PACIFIC trademark in connection with fences, fencing materials, and fencing services since as early as 1921.

Plaintiff brings this action because the Defendants are allegedly willfully infringing Plaintiff’s PACIFIC trademark by using the trademark PACIFIC NW FENCE & DECK to advertise and provide fencing services and by using the domain name pacificnwfenceanddeck.com.

Defendants apparently agreed to discontinue use of their trademark in 2016, temporarily stopped use in 2017-2018, but have since revived their use of the allegedly infringing trademark, hence this lawsuit.

Stay tuned for updates.

Pacific Fence and Wire Company v. M&M Pacific NW Contracting LLC et al.

Court Case Number: 3:18-cv-01106-PK
File Date: Monday, June 25, 2018
Plaintiff: Pacific Fence and Wire Company
Plaintiff Counsel: Owen W. Dukelow, David P. Cooper of Kolisch Hartwell, P.C.
Defendant: M&M Pacific NW Contracting LLC, Mike Wormington, Melissa K. Garris
Causes: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Paul Papak

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

 

Trademark and Unfair Competition lawsuit filed over expired software license

14 Friday Jul 2017

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anna J. Brown, Breach of Contract, Common Law False Advertising, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Copyright Infringement, False Advertising, False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Oregon Trademark Infringement, Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act, State Trademark Dilution, Tort of Conversion

This lawsuit involves the registered trademarks LEXILE, LEXILE FRAMEWORK, LEXILE ANALYZER and METAMETRICS.

The parties previously had a license by which the Defendants could use Plaintiff’s software, but it apparently expired on June 30, 2017.

MetaMetrics, Inc. v. NWEA et al.

Court Case Number: 3:17-cv-01059-BR
File Date: Thursday, July 6, 2017
Plaintiff: MetaMetrics, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Jeff Pitzer of Pitzer Law
Defendant: NWEA (f/k/a Evaluation Association), Matthew Chapman, Jeff Strickler
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, False Advertising, Copyright Infringement, Oregon Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Oregon Trademark Dilution, Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act, Common Law Unfair Competition, Common Law False Advertising, Breach of Contract, Tort of Conversion
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Anna J. Brown

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Local pizzeria owner may not be able to use own name

05 Wednesday Jul 2017

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anna J. Brown, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Federal Trademark Infringement

Patsy (Pat) makes pizzas.

New York-style pies are his specialty.

Patsy opens a restaurant in Oak Grove, Oregon called, wait for it, Patsy’s New York Pizzeria. “Best New York pizza in Portland!” Business is good, customers love him, say “He’s everybody’s dad.”

But just when life looked like easy street for Patsy, there’s a trademark lawsuit at his door. The Plaintiff in this lawsuit, a New York corporation, has been operating pizzerias under PATSY’S PIZZERIA or PATSY’s trademarks since 1933 and franchising the PATSY’S PIZZERIA trademark since 1996. Frank Sinatra apparently gave them a shout-out during a live concert in 1976.

Additionally, the name wasn’t the only alleged similarity. The Complaint (below) alleges that Patsy’s (Oregon) offered the same specialty pizzas as Plaintiff’s original menu.

Early conversations in 2015 between Patsy’s and Plaintiff’s counsel were leading toward Patsy changing his pizzeria’s name. However, Patsy has persisted with the name and the Plaintiff now seeks intervention by thefederal court for the District of Oregon.

Stay tuned for updates.

 

I.O.B. Realty, Inc. v. Pasquale DeSiervi d/b/a Patsy’s New York Pizzeria

Court Case Number: 3:17-cv-01023-BR
File Date: Friday, June 30, 2017
Plaintiff: I.O.B. Realty, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: James F. Halley of Law Firm of James F. Halley, P.C., Paul Grandinetti, Rebecca J. Stempien Coyle of Levy & Grandinetti
Defendant: Pasquale DeSiervi d/b/a Patsy’s New York Pizzeria, John Does 1-10
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Anna J. Brown

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Trademark lawsuit erupts over use of SUNWORKS with solar energy

13 Tuesday Jun 2017

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Ann L. Aiken, Federal Trademark Dilution, Federal Trademark Infringement

Plaintiff, a California corporation, has used the registered SUNWORKS trademark since 2010 in connection with installation, maintenance and repair of solar energy systems.

Defendant has operated a solar energy equipment supplier called “Sunworks” in Jackson County, Oregon since 2011.

Plaintiff alleges instances of actual confusion and that Defendant’s operations in Jackson County are an impediment to Plaintiff’s “long standing plan for market expansion.” Defendant has refused to discontinue use of its trademark.

Stay tuned for updates.

Sunworks United, Inc. v. Kirkland

Court Case Number: 1:17-cv-00896-AA
File Date: Wednesday, June 7, 2017
Plaintiff: Sunworks United, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Richard Billin
Defendant: C.J.Kirkland d/b/a Sunworks
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Ann L. Aiken

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Portland Home Show involved in trademark dispute

24 Wednesday May 2017

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Trademark Infringement Court: District of Oregon, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Michael H. Simon, Oregon State Trademark Infringement

This lawsuit involves alleged infringement of the PORTLAND HOME SHOW and PORTLAND HOME & GARDEN SHOW trademarks.

According to the Complaint, Defendant’s business model is “to travel to a location with an established and successful home show and produce a similarly named show several weeks in advance of the established show.”

The dispute originated way back in November 1999, so there’s history between the parties.

Stay tuned for updates.

PHGS, LLC, v. L&L Exhibition Management, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:17-cv-00795-SI
File Date: Monday, May 22, 2017
Plaintiff: PHGS, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: J. Peter Staples, Jack R. Scholz of Chernoff Vilhauer LLP
Defendant: L&L Exhibition Management, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Oregon State Trademark Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael H. Simon

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

adidas sues Puma over “Three-Stripe” Trademark

21 Tuesday Feb 2017

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

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Adidas, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Injury to Business Reputation, State Trademark Dilution, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices

The adidas “Three-Stripe” crusade rolls on, this time targeting Puma’s new four-striped soccer cleat.

Interestingly, unlike the other soccer cleats on the Puma website, this one doesn’t bear Puma’s classic formstrip logo.

screen-shot-2017-02-21-at-9-24-00-am

Click the Adidas tag on this post for other “Three-Stripe” litigation.

adidas America Inc. et al v. Puma North America, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00582
File Date: Wednesday, April 08, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG, adidas International Marketing B.V.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP, R.Charles Henn Jr. and Jennifer Fairbairn Deal of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
Defendant: Puma North America, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, State Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: TBD

View this document on Scribd

ROAMBUILT v. ROAM…are you confused?

28 Monday Nov 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, John V. Acosta

Both parties in this trademark lawsuit recently began using their respective trademarks (ROAMBUILT v. ROAM). ROAMBUILT is used in connection with “automotive parts,” primarily custom parts for Mercedes Benz Sprinter vans. ROAM is being used in connection with vehicle rental services and automobile customization services.

The parties corresponded for several months regarding the possibility of infringement and trademark coexistence. Unable to resolve the situation themselves, Plaintiff Roambuilt now seeks court intervention as they assert slight priority rights.

Stay tuned for updates.

screen-shot-2016-11-28-at-7-51-26-am

screen-shot-2016-11-28-at-7-52-36-am

Roambuilt LLC v. Roam, LLC

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-02217-AC
File Date: Wednesday, November 23, 2016
Plaintiff: Roambuilt LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Elizabeth Tedesco Milesnick of Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP
Defendant: Roam, LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: John V. Acosta

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd
← Older posts

Categories

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Oregon Intellectual Property Blog
    • Join 147 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Oregon Intellectual Property Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...