12 results for 'cat:"Sanctions" AND cat:"Trademark"'.
J. Horan finds that a health care management company’s failure to produce court ordered documents in an underlying trademark case brought by a group of hospital emergency rooms is not excusable just because the company says it faced technical difficulties retrieving the documents. The limited number of documents that the company failed to produce are of specific and central importance to the case suggesting an attempt to evade the court’s order to produce. The court grants sanction measures requested by the emergency rooms.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Horan, Filed On: April 8, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv891, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, trademark, Attorney Fees
J. Williams denies the trademark owner's motion for sanctions, ruling the infringing company provided documents requested after its initial discovery responses were insufficient, while the owner provides no support for its claim the documents are unusable or not what it requested following the first round of discovery.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Williams, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv1056, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, trademark, Discovery
J. Gonzalez issues sanctions against a competing vitamin and nutritional supplement supplier in a trademark infringement lawsuit. The court grants an award of fees to the litigant to cover the costs incurred as a result of the defendant’s failures to comply with the court’s discovery orders, including its failure to provide information that would help the litigant understand documents related to its advertising costs.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Gonzalez, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv3734, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, trademark
J. Bernal denies Monster Energy's motion for sanctions in its lawsuit accusing the pharmaceutical company's products of infringing on Monster's trademarks. Monster Energy does not prove that the pharmaceutical company acted in bad faith as the deposition of the latter's former sales executive often explicitly corroborates the statements that Monster contends are false. The record shows that the executive participated in the pharmaceutical company's preparation and ratified its content during the injunction proceedings, and other witness testimony supports the disputed contents of the executive's declaration.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Bernal, Filed On: December 14, 2023, Case #: 5:18cv1882, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: sanctions, trademark, Discovery
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Jordan grants the company's motions to compel in a trademark case involving the alleged sale of infringing products on Amazon Storefronts. The company's former independent distributors are ordered to amend or supplement their initial disclosures and discovery responses due to their prior conflicting and confusing responses on key issues in the case. "To say that defendants have some explaining to do is an understatement."
Court: USDC Eastern District of Texas , Judge: Jordan, Filed On: December 13, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv900, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, trademark, Discovery
J. Pregerson grants a motion from Nike and Nordstrom for terminating sanctions based on N.T.A.A.'s discovery misconduct in its litigation alleging that Nordstrom continuously branded its products with a specially designed "N" that belonged to N.T.A.A. The business owner of N.T.A.A. intentionally destroyed or attempted to destroy electronically stored information (ESI) relevant to this case, and the ESI investigation revealed the possible existence of numerous devices, accounts and user names that the business owner did not disclose.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Pregerson, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv398, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, trademark, Discovery
J. Mazzant awards the guitar maker $1,248 in net profits and $9,176 in attorney fees on its post-verdict claim of contempt against the competitor that was still selling infringing guitars in violation of the permanent injunction against it.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Texas , Judge: Mazzant, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 4:19cv358, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: sanctions, trademark, Attorney Fees