Maryland Intellectual Property Lawyer & Attorney : Brian Wm. Higgins : Serving Baltimore, Columbia, Frederick

     The sixth IP-related lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in 2008 involves a trademark dispute (source: Justia). 

• #6: Flagstar Bank, FSB v. Fundstar Financial, LLC, No. 8:2008cv00206, filed January 24, 2008; assigned to J. Messitte

     Michigan-based Flagstar Bank allegedly owns federal trademarks FLAGSTAR and FLAGSTAR BANK (word and design), which it uses in connection with lending and banking services. Defendant Fundstar Financial, based in Germantown, MD, allegedly began using the marks FUNDSTAR and FUNDSTAR FINANCIAL (word and design), in connection with mortgage banking services in Maryland. Plaintiff Flagstar is suing for trademark infringement; false designation of origin or sponsorship, false advertising, and trade dress; and common law trademark infringement.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

     Last week, there was one IP-related case filed in the the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (source: Justia), this one captioned Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America v. The Wilder Spice Company, No. 1:2007cv03122 (D. Md. 2007) (filed Nov. 21, 2007).

     Plaintiff Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America is a New York not-for-profit corporation with its principal place of business in New York City. The Orthodox Union provides kosher product certifications for products prepared according to special Jewish dietary laws. On its website, Orthodox Union states that the word kosher means "proper or acceptable," and the term originates from "kosher laws [that] have their origin in the Bible, and are detailed in the Talmud and the other codes of Jewish traditions. They have been applied through the centuries to ever-changing situations, and these rulings, both ancient and modern, govern OU Kosher certification." The Orthodox Union is the alleged owner of the OU mark, which has reportedly been used in commerce since 1925 on food-related products as an indicator that such products have been certified as kosher.

     Defendant Wilder Spice Company is a Baltimore, Maryland-based company that, according to court papers, sells spice products in the U.S. under branded and private labels through retail, foodservice, and industrial channels. Orthodox Union alleges that Wilder forged a Letter of Certification that falsely represented that the Orthodox Union had certified Wilder products as kosher, and that several of Wilder's products have been sold bearing the OU mark. It is claiming federal and state trademark infringement under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)), false designation of origin (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)), dilution of its allegedly famous mark (11 U.S.C. § 1125(c)), and common law unfair competition and trademark infringement. Orthodox Union is seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction, an accounting, and monetary damages.

     David Butler and Jason Scherr of Bingham McCutchen LLP (Washington, DC) filed the complaint on behalf of Orthodox Union.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

     The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland was chosen as the forum for litigating the following cases, as published by Justia:

• Moulin Rouge, S.A. v. Moulin Rouge Caterers, Inc. et al, 07 civ 02482 (D. Md. 2007), filed Sep. 18, 2007.

According to court papers, Plaintiff Moulin Rouge, S.A., is a Belgian corporation having its principal place of business in Paris, France. It owns the famous French trademark MOULIN ROUGE, which, in English, means "red windmill."  The mark has allegedly been in use in France continuously since 1889 when the famous Parisian cabaret first opened (first use in commerce in the U.S. since 1981). Moulin Rouge reportedly owns several U.S. trademark registrations covering live music stage shows and theater productions.  Defendants are Gaithersburg, MD-based Moulin Rouge Caterers and its owner Mohammad Taghi Yahyavi. Moulin Rouge, S.A., which is represented by Robert Bowie, Jr. of BOWIE & JENSEN LLC, is alleging trademark dilution, infringement, and unfair competition.

• Allegis Group, Inc. v. Bizet Human Asset Management, 07 civ 02497 (D. Md. 2007), filed Sep. 18, 2007.  

In court papers, Plaintiff Hanover, MD-based Allegis Group, Inc., which provide human capital services, alleges it has used the mark "PEOPLE. SERVICE. PERFORMANCE" in commerce before Pittsburgh, PA-based Bizet Human Asset Management began using  its federal trademark "PEOPLE.  PROCESS.  PERFORMANCE."  When Bizet allegedly failed to cease using its trademark on its website, despite canceling its registration, Allegis sued for infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1051.  Allegis Group is represented by Sherry Flax of Saul Ewing LLP.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland was chosen as the forum for litigating the following case(s), as published by Justia:

• Archstone Consulting LLC v. Archstone Portfolio Solutions, LLC, Case Number 1:2007cv02070, filed Aug. 3, 2007

According to its Complaint, Plaintiff Archstone Consulting LLC, is a Delaware company that provides business and financial management services under its mark ARCHSTONE CONSULTING.  It alleges that Defendant Archstone Portfolio Solutions, LLC, is a Lutherville, MD-based company that reportedly provides institutional and individual investment consulting services under the name ARCHSTONE PORTFOLIO SOLUTIONS.  It further alleges that the ARCHSTONE PORTFOLIO SOLUTIONS name infringes its ARCHSTONE CONSULTING mark in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114(1)(a).  Its Complaint includes claims of unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a), and infringement and unfair competition under Maryland common law.

• Young Again Products, Inc. v. Vitamins Home, Case Number 1:2007cv02073, filed Aug. 3, 2007

Plaintiff Young Again Products, Inc., a Maryland company that describes itself as being "in the business of production and sale of health and nutritional supplements," has sued Vitamins Home, an Israeli company with a place of business in Texas, for allegedly "engag[ing] in the unauthorized use of the Young Again™ Mark by utilizing the Mark in pay-for-placement and pay- for-rank search engine advertising to direct Internet customers to its on-line nutritional supplement store," in violation of 15 U.S.C. sec. 1051. Other claims include dilution of a famous mark under 15 U.S.C. 1125(c), and common law unfair competition. Young Again Products is seeking a declaratory judgment enjoining Vitamins Home from using the Young Again mark, and other relief. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland was chosen as the forum for litigating the following case(s), as published by Justia:

• Global Barbeque, LLC v. Rub, LLC, Case Number 1:2007cv02021, filed July 27, 2007

New York City-based Global Barbeque, LLC, and Rub BBQ Restaurant # 1 (the RUB BBQ restaurant) have sued Michael Marx (alleged owner of Baltimore's Rub Barbeque restaurant) and RUB, LLC, for alleged trademark infringement, dilution, and state law claims arising out of the use of the word RUB in connection with its retail food services.  Plaintiffs are seeking, among other relief, an injunction, an order barring use of the word RUB in connection with Defendants' web site URL, an accounting of profits, and compensatory and punitive damages.

• Tarpo Music Publishing v. Lifestyle, LLC, Case Number 1:2007cv02029, filed July 30, 2007 

Plaintiffs Tarpo Music Publishing, EMI April Music Inc., Notting Dale Songs, Inc., Controversy Music, Basement Boys Music, Inc., C-Water Publishing, Inc., WB Music Corp., Webo Girl Publishing, Inc., EMI Waterford Music, Inc., Jobete Music Co., Inc. and Rodsongs have sued Defendants Lifestyle, LLC, Leonard Clarke and Gyeong M. Cho for alleged copyright infringement based on "public performances of copyrighted musical compositions" at Baltimore's Red Maple bar, which is reportedly operated and managed by Defendants (see complaint).  Listed compositions include Ain't No Mountain High Enough, among five others alleged to be infringed. 

• Plastic Safety Systems, Inc. v. Road Safety, LLC, Case Number 1:2007cv02068, filed August 2, 2007

Cleveland, OH-based Plastic Safety Systems, Inc., has sued Glen Burnie, MD-based Road Safety, LLC and Millersville, MD-based Reliable Contracting Company, Inc., for allegedly infringing Plastic Safety's U.S. Patent No. 5,234,280, which is directed to traffic "channeling" devices in the form of large drums (see image).  According to its complaint, Defendants allegedly used or induced the use of infringing drums along Rt. 50 in Annapolis. 

• Young Again Products, Inc. v. JMS Partners Enterprises, Ltd., Case Number 1:2007cv02072, filed August 3, 2007

Plaintiff Young Again Products, Inc., a Maryland company that describes itself as being "in the business of production and sale of health and nutritional supplements," has sued JMS Partners Enterprises, Ltd., for allegedly "engag[ing] in the unauthorized use of the Young Again™ Mark by selling products displaying the Mark and by using the Mark on its website to sell its products" in violation of 28 U.S.C. 1338.  Other claims include unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) (Lanham Act), and dilution of a famous mark under 15 U.S.C. 1125(c).  Young Again Products is seeking a declatory judgment enjoining JMS from using the Young Again mark, and other relief.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks