Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc. v. Yukon Fitness Equipment, Inc.

United States District Court, C.D. California, Western Divison

March 7, 2014

MAD DOGG ATHLETICS, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
YUKON FITNESS EQUIPMENT, INC., an Ohio corporation d/b/a Yukon Fitness and Yukon International, Inc., Defendant. YUKON INTERNATIONAL, INC., an Ohio corporation d/b/a Yukon Fitness Equipment, Inc., Counter-Claimant,
v.
MAD DOGG ATHLETICS, INC., a California corporation, Counter-Defendant.

Vonn R. Christenson (SBN 244873), CHRISTENSON LAW FIRM, LLP, Porterville, CA, Attorneys for Defendant, YUKON INTERNATIONAL, INC., an Ohio corporation d/b/a YUKON FITNESS EQUIPMENT, INC.

Konrad Karl Gatien (SBN 221770), STUBBSrdALDERTON & MARKILES LLP, Santa Monica, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff MAD DOGG ATHLETICS, INC.

FINAL JUDGMENT UPON CONSENT WITH RESPECT TO DEFENDANT YUKON INTERNATIONAL, INC. D/B/A YUKON FITNESS EQUIPMENT, INC.

FERNANDO M. OLGUIN, District Judge.

Plaintiff MAD DOGG ATHLETICS, INC. ("Mad Dogg" or "Plaintiff"), having filed a Complaint in this action charging defendant YUKON INTERNATIONAL, INC. d/b/a YUKON FITNESS EQUIPMENT, INC. ("Yukon" or "Defendant") with federal trademark counterfeiting and infringement under 15 U.S.C § 1114; federal unfair competition and false designation of origin under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); federal trademark dilution under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c); California state statutory unfair competition under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.; and constructive trust under Cal. Civ. Code § 2224; and Yukon having filed a Counterclaim against Mad Dogg for declaratory judgment of non-infringement under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, and cancellation of the subject mark under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1064 and 1119; and the parties desiring to settle the controversy between them, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as between the parties hereto that:

1. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 15 U.S.C §§ 1116(a) and 1121; 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a), 1338(a) and (b), 1367, and 2201 et seq. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and 1400(b). The parties do not contest service of process or jurisdiction.

2. Mad Dogg represents that it was founded in 1994 and is a leader in the United States and worldwide of indoor cycling instruction and the sale of stationary exercise bicycles and goods and services related thereto offered under its SPIN Family of Trademarks, which are identified in Exhibit A attached hereto.

3. In particular, with respect to this action, Mad Dogg has created, developed, marketed and sold the SPIN® brand line of indoor cycles (hereinafter referred to as the "SPIN® brand indoor cycles"). Mad Dogg markets its SPIN® brand indoor cycles under its federally registered SPIN trademark (Reg. No. 2173202) (hereinafter referred to as the "SPIN® trademark").

4. Defendant expressly acknowledges and agrees that Mad Dogg is the exclusive owner of all right, title and interest in and to the SPIN® trademark, and that Mad Dogg has valid, protectable and enforceable rights in and to the SPIN® trademark, which is in full force and effect, and has become incontestable pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1065.

5. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant has advertised, distributed, offered for sale and sold indoor cycles through the use of the SPIN® trademark, which Plaintiff alleges constitute counterfeits and infringements of said mark. Defendant denies Plaintiff's allegations.

6. By way of settlement, Defendant and its affiliates, agents, servants, employees, representatives, successors, assigns, and any person or entity acting under Defendant's direction or control, or in active concert or participation with Defendant, are hereby immediately and permanently enjoined throughout the world from:

a. directly or indirectly infringing the SPIN® trademark in any manner, including generally, but not limited to, manufacturing, importing, distributing, advertising, offering for sale and/or selling any merchandise or engaging in any services by using any terms, trademarks or other designations of origin that reproduce, or utilize the likenesses of or which copy or are confusingly similar to the SPIN® trademark;

b. engaging in any conduct that tends falsely to represent that, or which is likely to confuse, mislead, or deceive purchasers, Defendant's customers, and/or members of the public to believe that, the actions of Defendant, the products sold by Defendant or Defendant itself are connected with Mad Dogg, are sponsored, approved, or licensed by Mad Dogg, or are in some way connected or affiliated with Mad Dogg;

c. affixing, applying, annexing or using in connection with the manufacture, importation, distribution, advertising, offer for sale and/or sale, or other use of any goods or services, any false description or representation, including words or other symbols, tending to falsely ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.