Maryland IP Litigation Cases for the Week of October 1, 2007
Below is a summary of the IP-related cases filed in the the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland during the week beginning October 1, 2007 (source: Justia), beginning with an IP NIMBY case:
- Invenergy Wind North America LLC v. John Doe Numbers 1 Through 10, 07civ02643, filed Oct. 1, 2007.
According to the complaint, this case arises from an email that plaintiff Invenergy, a Delaware entity based out of Chicago, alleges that opponents to its proposed Moresville Energy wind turbine energy project sent to landowners and leaseholders of land Invenergy needs for its project. The complained of email, which included Invenergy's logos and trademarks, was allegedly designed to look like it originated from Invenergy itself. The complaint includes claims of trademark and copyright infringement, trademark dilution, tortious interference, and libel.
Although the planned facility is to be located in Delaware County, New York, Maryland was chosen as the venue for the litigation, apparently because the permit applicant for the wind energy facility is Rockville, MD-based Moresville Energy LLC (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Invenergy), and because the email was allegedly sent by ten unidentified "John Does" (or "Jane Does") over networks owned by Hughes Network Systems , LLC, which is a Germantown, MD-based company.
Thelen Reid's DC office filed the complaint, which did not identify local Maryland counsel.
In the "old days," someone with a NIMBY (not in my backyard) issue would simply lie in front of a bulldozer, chain themselves to a Redwood, maneuver a boat in front of a fishing vessel, organize a protest rally, or file a lawsuit against the federal or state agency that issued a permit for a project they disagreed with (or all of the above). Apparently, if the above complaint is true, surreptitious emailing can now be added to the list of protest tactics.
Three more interesting cases after the jump...
- Nacre AS v. Silynx Communications, Inc. et al, 07civ02676, filed Oct. 2, 2007.
Plaintiff Nacre AS is a Norwegian company with a principal place of business in Trondheim, Norway. It claims to own the U.S. registered trademark QUIETPRO, which it uses in connection with “two-way radios and wireless communicators for use in combat, in battlefield conditions, in military, military special forces, and law enforcement activities,” among other uses. It also owns U.S. Patent No. 7,039,195 (“Ear Terminal”) and U.S. Patent No. 6,567,524 ("Noise Protection Verification Device").
Defendant is Rockville, MD-based Silynx Communications (cool website), which claims to be “a world leader in miniature software defined tactical hearing protection communication headsets. Our innovative headsets are used by the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), US Army, USMC and the world’s elite Special Forces. Silynx specializes in the design, development and manufacturing of advanced and innovative software based noise protection communication headsets that provide Special Forces with an unparalleled operational edge while enhancing survivability, lethality and situational awareness.” Also named as defendant is Gil Limonchik, Silynx's CEO (who, according to court papers, is a former Nacre consultant).
Nacre contends that Silynx’s QUIETOPS mark, which is the subject of Silynx’s trademark application, is confusingly similar to its QUIETPRO mark. It also contends that defendants are infringing the ‘195 and '524 patents.
The complaint was filed by Andrew Kopsidas of DC's Fish & Richardson; local counsel was not identified.
- Stars-N-Bars Entertainment, Inc v. Golzar et al., 07civ02675, filed Oct. 3, 2007.
This case is one of "breach of contract, trademark infringement, unfair competition, and passing off," and involves the alleged use of plaintiff's STARS-N-BARS registered trademark by defendants during "Texas Hold'Em poker tournaments at various entertainment establishments throughout Maryland and Virginia." Plaintiff Stars-N-Bars Entertainment alleges it was owed money under a contract that provided for the licensed use of the Stars-N-Bars trademark. The complaint was filed by Timothy Guy Smith, P.C., of Glenwood, MD.
- The Compassionate Friends, Inc. v. The Compassionate Friends of Maryland, Inc., 07civ02679, filed Oct. 4, 2007.
The case caption is fairly suggestive of what this case is about, and indeed it involves the U.S. registered trademark THE COMPASSIONATE FRIENDS. Plaintiff The Compassionate Friends, Inc., an Illinois not-for-profit company that owns several trademarks, has sued The Compassionate Friends of Maryland, Inc., which is based in Baltimore. The Maryland entity was allegedly formerly one of Plaintiff's unincorporated chapters (organized in 1978). The complaint alleges likelihood of confusion, infringement (of the aforementioned federal trademark, as well as plaintiff's Maryland state registered trademark), false designation of origin, and federal statutory and Maryland common law unfair competition. The complaint is signed by Michael Yang and Charles Simmons of the Gorman & Williams law firm (Baltimore).
