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.

SPY Optic Inc. v. Individuals, Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule

United States District Court, C.D. California

July 6, 2017

SPY OPTIC INC., a California Corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
THE INDIVIDUALS, PARTNERSHIPS AND UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE "A" and DOES 1-10, Defendants.

          Brent H. Blakely (SBN 157292) Cindy Chan (SBN 247495) Attorneys for Plaintiff Spy Optic Inc.

          [PROPOSED] ORDER RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

          John F. Walter Judge

         PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER

         THIS CAUSE being before the Court on Plaintiff Spy Optic Inc.'s ("Plaintiff or "Spy Optic") Motion for Entry of a Preliminary Injunction, and this Court having heard the evidence before it hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion for Entry of a Preliminary Injunction in its entirety against the Defendants identified on Schedule A attached hereto (collectively, the "Defendants").

         THIS COURT HEREBY FINDS that it has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants since the Defendants have targeted sales from California residents by operating online retail businesses that offer shipping to the United States, including California, accepting payment in U.S. dollars and, has sold products bearing counterfeit versions of Spy Optic's federally registered trademarks to residents in California, a list of which is included in the below chart (collectively "SPY Marks"):

         ****

         THIS COURT FURTHER FINDS that injunctive relief previously granted in the Temporary Restraining Order and Order Restraining Transfer of Assets and for Expedited Discovery ("TRO") should remain in place through the pendency of this litigation and that issuing this Preliminary Injunction is warranted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65. Evidence submitted in support of this Motion and in support of Spy Optic's previously granted Motion for Entry of a TRO establishes that Spy Optic has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits; that no remedy at law exists; and that Spy Optic will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.

         Specifically, Spy Optic has proved a prima facie case of trademark infringement because (1) Spy Optic's SPY Marks are distinctive marks and are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on the Principal Register, (2) Defendants are not licensed or authorized to use any of Spy Optic's SPY Marks, and (3) Defendants' use of the SPY Marks is causing a likelihood of confusion as to the origin or sponsorship of Defendants' products with Spy Optic's products. Furthermore, Defendants' continued and unauthorized use of the SPY Marks irreparably harms Spy Optic through diminished goodwill and brand confidence, damage to Spy Optic's reputation, loss of exclusivity, and loss of future sales. Monetary damages fail to address such damage and, therefore, Spy Optic has an inadequate remedy at law. Moreover, the public interest is served by entry of this Preliminary Injunction to dispel the public confusion created by Defendants' actions.

         Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBEY ORDERED that:

         1. Defendants, their affiliates, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, confederates, and all persons acting for, with, by, through, under or in active concert with them be preliminarily enjoined and restrained from:

         a. using the SPY Marks or any reproductions, counterfeit copies or colorable imitations thereof in any manner in connection with the distribution, marketing, advertising, offering for sale, or sale of any product that is not a genuine Spy Optic product or is not authorized by Spy Optic to be sold in connection with the SPY Marks;

         b. manufacturing, shipping, delivering, holding for sale, transferring or otherwise moving, storing, distributing, returning, or otherwise disposing of, in any manner, products or inventory not manufactured by or for Spy Optic, nor authorized by Spy Optic to be sold or offered for sale, and which bear any of the SPY Marks or any reproductions, counterfeit copies or colorable imitations thereof;

         c. passing off, inducing, or enabling others to sell or pass off any product as a genuine Spy Optic product or any other product produced by Spy Optic, that is not Spy Optics' or not produced under the authorization, control or supervision of Spy Optic and approved by Spy Optic for sale under the SPY Marks; and

         d. committing any acts calculated to cause consumers to believe that Defendants' products are those sold under the authorization, control or supervision of Spy Optic, or are sponsored by, approved by, or otherwise connected with Spy Optic; 2. Defendants and any persons in active concert or participation with them who have actual notice of this Order shall be temporarily and preliminarily restrained and enjoined ...


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.