57. Com, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co., 202 F.3d 1199, 1205 n. 3 (9th Cir.2000). (Entered: 02/26/2009), ADR Clerks Notice Appointing James Gilliland as Mediator. ORDER REFERRING MOTION re 61 Motion for Attorney Fees. Id. Clamp Mfg. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia. Case reassigned to Hon. Plaintiff argues that this factor is germane only where the marks are different, and inapposite in cases such as the present where the marks are identical. "A strong possibility that either party may expand his business to compete with the other will weigh in favor of finding that the present use is infringing." *1122 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket 36) is GRANTED. at 24:1-12 ("at the time we were located on Sand Hill Road. Def. Defendant's business focuses on purchasing, holding, selling, managing and leasing commercial real estate in the San Francisco Bay Area solely for its own investment purposes. Two Pesos, 505 U.S. at 769, 112 S.Ct. 's Mot. C Seeing developments that could cause 5% pullback: Sand Hill Global Advisors CIO. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia. Prods., Inc. v. Beckman Instruments, Inc., 718 F.2d 1201, 1206 (1st Cir. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case. 0000004889 00000 n Ex. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. (Davidson Decl. As such, to survive summary judgment, a plaintiff is "required to come forward with enough evidence of secondary meaning to establish a genuine dispute of fact." "Marks are often classified in categories of generally increasing distinctiveness; . Plaintiff then sought to change its name from "Sand Hill Advisors, Inc." to "Sand Hill Advisors, LLC." 0000000940 00000 n To update this case yourself, sign into PACER (paid PACER subscription required). (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Declaration of James P. Martin, # 2 Appendix Proposed Order)(Martin, James) (Filed on 12/2/2009) Modified on 12/3/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). See Lahoti v. VeriCheck, Inc., 586 F.3d 1190, 1197 (9th Cir. L.) Although it is not engaged in the purchase or sale of real estate on behalf of its clients, Plaintiff does provide advice and counseling on investments in real property and Real Estate Investment Trusts, real estate financing alternatives, management alternatives, asset allocation and trends in the real estate market. Here, after considering each of the Sleekcraft factors, the Court concluded that while Plaintiff and Defendant share the same mark, they offer completely distinct services to distinct consumers in separate markets, and there was but a paucity of evidence of actual confusion. This argument is based on nothing but sheer speculation, which is not evidence. 's Mot. Accordingly, a genuine issue for trial exists if the non-movant presents evidence from which a reasonable jury, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to that party, could resolve the material issue in his or her favor. (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2008) (Entered: 12/16/2008), ANSWER to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses, Exhibits A - D by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Pretrial Conference set for 2/16/2010 01:00 PM.. 0000002351 00000 n At Sand Hill, we have long-standing experience with RSUs, deferred compensation, and specialized tax ), Defendant's business focuses on purchasing, holding, selling, managing and leasing commercial real estate in the San Francisco Bay Area solely for its own investment purposes. 's Opp'n to Def. 2753. Ex. She testified that such mark was chosen because of its geographical reference, since they worked and lived in that area, and were active in the community. Notice of Settlement Conference and Settlement Conference Order for 1/13/2010 02:00 PM in Courtroom F, 15th Floor, San Francisco. WebPlaintiff, Sand Hill Advisors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, filed the instant service mark infringement action under the Lanham Act seeking to prevent Defendant, 57. If the moving party meets this initial burden, the burden then shifts to the non-moving party to present specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions. "Secondary meaning can be established in many ways, including (but not limited to) direct consumer testimony; survey evidence; exclusivity, manner, and length of use of a mark; amount and manner of advertising; amount of sales and number of customers; established place in the market; and proof of intentional copying by the defendant." at 769, 112 S.Ct. (Hill Decl. 42. for Summ. Evidence that use of a mark or name has already caused actual confusion as to the source of a product or service is "persuasive proof that future confusion is *1121 likely." (Opp'n at 23.) 10; Davidson Decl. Struck (Defendant); As to: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); Shima Capitol LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant) et al. As a result of Plaintiff's inability to register the name "Sand Hill Advisors LLC" with the California Secretary of State, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court on Inc., 287 F.3d 866, 871 (9th Cir.2002) (use of "Japan" in "Japan Telecom, Inc." did not "automatically make the trade name geographically descriptive"); Forschner Group, 30 F.3d at 355 ("That a phrase or term evokes geographic associations does not, standing alone, support a finding of geographic descriptiveness."). Why is this public record being published online? 2753. 0000013270 00000 n (Related document(s) 48 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/28/2009) Modified on 12/30/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Surfvivor Media, 406 F.3d at 631-32. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 06/23/10. VS ADAM B. at 249-50, 106 S.Ct. (Opp'n at 19.) Plaintiff attempted to register its new name with the California Secretary of State, but was informed that Defendant had previously registered the name with the State in 1999. Thus, despite Defendant's protestations the contrary, Mr. Conway's deposition testimony does not show that Plaintiff "knew" that it lacked a protectable mark. 5 and Ex. No calendar events were found for this docket. Plaintiff also has made no showing that Plaintiff and Defendant attend the same networking events or that their "word-of-mouth" referrals involve the same demographic. "If the evidence is merely colorable, or is not significantly probative, summary judgment may be granted." Art Attacks Ink, LLC, 581 F.3d at 1146 (affirming summary judgment for alleged infringer where plaintiff failed to produce any evidence to demonstrate that its advertising was effective). Def. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital 79, Filing The district court must review de novo "those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." Next, Plaintiff asserts that "Sand Hill" is suggestive ostensibly because it evokes qualities "associated with the Silicon Valley entrepreneurial community much like `Broadway' evokes qualities associated with New York's commercial theatre district and `Rodeo' evokes connotations of upscale shops in Beverly Hills." AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341, 348-49 (9th Cir.1979). (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2009) Modified on 2/25/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). However, the mark "Sand Hill Advisors" leaves little to the imagination. 2.) (Opp'n at 22-23.) (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 2/19/2009) Modified on 2/20/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). B, Williams Depo. Within fourteen days of service of the proposed findings and recommendations, "any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court." Unlike Plaintiff, Defendant does not provide any advice to any third party, and has no involvement in providing wealth management services. See Brookfield Commc'ns, 174 F.3d at 1056 (likelihood of confusion resulting from the use of the same or similar mark was "remote" if the parties "did not compete" with one another); Dynamics Research Corp. v. Langenau Mfg. "A geographically descriptive term or phrase is one that designates geographical location and would tend to be regarded by buyers as descriptive of the geographic location or origin of the goods or services." 2004). at 212:7-10. WebDefendant Sand Hill Advisors LLCs stipulation to amend its Answer to assert additional Affirmative Defenses challenging Plaintiffs legal capacity and standing to bring its The top five bank holding companies have combined total consumer loan portfolios of more than $1.8 trillion as of December 31, 2022. Since it began using the "Sand Hill Advisors LLC" mark in 1999, Defendant has received only five or six telephone calls and received a package intended for Plaintiff. Stephen W. Boney, Inc. v. Boney Servs., Inc., 127 F.3d 821, 827 (9th Cir. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, Declaration - DECLARATION OF ADAM B. Aug. 13, 2007). Summary. Nearly two years after its last loan, the Paycheck Protection Program is still making headlines for all the wrong reasons, unfortunately. 0000001817 00000 n The Court is persuaded by the record presented that any overlap in the parties' marketing channels is nil or minimal, which weighs in favor of Defendant. ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong GRANTING 35 Ex Parte Motion to Move the Hearing Date for Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Setting Hearing on Motion For Summary Judgment to 1/12/2010 at 01:00 PM. Plaintiff has filed an opposition to the motion, accompanied by objections to certain of the evidence offered by Defendant in support of its motion. Like Boston Private Financial, which manages about $4 billion of assets, Sand Hill has placed an emphasis on serving owners and operators of private businesses, a largely underserved market, Mr. Pressey said. Here, Plaintiff asserts that its evidence shows that since it changed its name in 1995 to "Sand Hill Advisors," it has advertised the mark through a variety of *1118 channels. at 12, Dkt. In November 2007, Plaintiff converted from a Delaware corporation to a Delaware limited liability company. DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk, U.S. District Courts | Other | Pl. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James on 6/1/2010. at 27:13-23 ("[W]e had been located at Sand Hill Road and actually were a very active part of the community around that area. Pursuant to Local Rule 3-16 (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 2/2/2009) (Entered: 02/02/2009), Certificate of Interested Entities by Sand Hill Advisors LLC Pursuant to Local Rule 3-16 (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 1/30/2009) (Entered: 01/30/2009), ***ERRONEOUS ENTRY, PLEASE REFER TO DOCUMENT 19 *** Certificate of Interested Entities by Sand Hill Advisors LLC Pursuant to Local Rule 3-16 (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 1/30/2009) Modified on 2/3/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). See Fed.R.Civ.P. at 111:25-112:11 149:3-151:7.) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Related document(s) 47 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/22/2009) Modified on 12/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 's Mot. 0000001201 00000 n 08/29/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department R at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Status Conference, Updated -- Denis Shmidt (Attorney): Organization Name changed from Orsus Gate LLP to HARDER STONEROCK LLP, Notice of Change of Firm Name; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); Shima Capitol Management LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant); Shima Capitol GP LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant); New Firm Name: HARDER STONEROCK LLP, Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by: Amnon Siegel (Attorney), Address for Amnon Siegel (Attorney) updated. (quoting Union Carbide Corp. v. Ever-Ready Inc., 531 F.2d 366, 379 (7th Cir. E at 128:22-129:1, Dkt. NOTICE OF REFERENCE AND ORDER SCHEDULING HEARING: Hearing set for 04/08/2010 at 10:00 AM, re 61 Motion for Attorney Fees. The Rodeo Collection court held that under both tests, the mark "Rodeo Collection," and the component term "Collection" were "more than merely descriptive as used to identify a shopping center." And so that was our address, but we felt it was an address that we wanted to trumpet. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/28/2009) Modified on 5/29/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). In addition, the Court may consider further evidence or remand the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. Def. Pl. 1117(a). 61, 64, 84, 85 Defendant. There are three ways in which a plaintiff can establish that it has a protectable interest in a service mark or trademark: "(1) it has a federally registered mark in goods or services; (2) its mark is descriptive but has acquired a secondary meaning in the market; or (3) it has a suggestive mark, which is inherently distinctive and protectable." Assuming without deciding that Plaintiff's date of first use was March 25, 1995, Defendant has presented uncontroverted evidence demonstrating that it used the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark within five years of that date. A, McCaffrey Depo. (Entered: 12/11/2009), ORDER by Judge ARMSTRONG granting 40 Ex Parte Application (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/4/2009), Ex Parte MOTION to Modify Briefing Schedule re Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. Viewing the record in a light most favorable to Plaintiff, the Court finds that no reasonable jury could find that the parties' common use of the "Sand Hill Mark" is sufficient to create a likelihood of confusion. Ex. (Entered: 01/21/2010), Minute Entry: Settlement Conference held on 1/13/10 before Magistrate Judge James Larson. On January 12, 2010, the parties appeared through counsel for oral argument on the motion. Company Type For Profit. Thus, the Court concludes that "Sand Hill Advisors" is primarily geographically descriptive. Sciences Corp., 511 F.3d at 973. 56(e); Orr v. Bank of Am., 285 F.3d 764, 773 (9th Cir. The record shows that over the course of the last ten years since Defendant began using the "Sand Hill Advisors" name, it has received only five or six telephone calls and one package intended for Plaintiff. The similarity of the marks, proximity of the goods or service and marketing channels used constitute "the controlling troika in the Sleekcraft analysis," GoTo.com, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co., 202 F.3d 1199, 1205 (9th Cir.2000), and are considered the most important, see Brookfield Commc'ns, Inc. v. W. Coast Entm't Corp., 174 F.3d 1036, 1055 n. 16 (9th Cir.1999). Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 9/15/10. According to Defendant, Plaintiff supposedly knew that it had no protectable mark because it did not seek to register its mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office until 2008, even though it had been using the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark since 1995. In sum, the undisputed evidence establishes that Defendant was using the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark within five years of Plaintiff claimed dated of first use. Filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. VIA TELEPHONE. at 24:9-11. The record unequivocally establishes that Plaintiff and Defendant's respective businesses share little, if anything, in common. Fed.R.Civ.P 72(b)(1); see Holder v. Holder, 392 F.3d 1009, 1022 (9th Cir. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2010) Modified on 2/18/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 56, Filing (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2009) Modified on 11/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). The Ninth Circuit construes the "exceptional cases" requirement narrowly. 's Mot. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC v. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC. Though ultimately concluding that such evidence was insufficient to establish a issue of fact regarding secondary meaning, the Court did not find that Plaintiff's position was groundless or baseless. As to the word "Advisors," the PTO found that such term is generic or descriptive, and that its inclusion in the proposed mark did not diminish its finding that the mark is primarily geographically descriptive. C, Conway Depo. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria Plaintiff is a self-styled "wealth management" firm currently located in Menlo Park, California. 10 22 As a result, Plaintiff changed its state of incorporation from California to Delaware. The lack of overlap is underscored by the paucity of evidence of actual confusion, which consists of nothing more than a few misplaced calls and a misdelivered package over the course of the last ten years. Aside from being devoid of evidentiary support, Plaintiff's argument misses the point. %PDF-1.3 Previously, Brenda was an Emeritus Boa rd Member at Boys & Girls Clubs of America and also held positions at CFA Society San Francisco, S&P Global. Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC, SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC, a California limited liability company. 41, Filing Id. STIPULATION AND ORDER: To Allow Defendant to Amend Answer, Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 5/27/09. (Entered: 12/23/2009), RESPONSE to re 45 Objection to Evidence filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. F at 2.) As an initial matter, Defendant argues that since Plaintiff's founders acknowledged choosing SAND HILL ADVISORS because of its geographical significance, i.e., the company's then new location on Sand Hill Road in the heart of the Silicon Valley, Plaintiff was foreclosed from arguing that the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark was anything other than descriptive. "Secondary meaning can be established in many ways, including (but not limited to) direct consumer testimony; survey evidence; exclusivity, manner, and length of use of a mark; amount and manner of advertising; amount of sales and number of customers; established place in the market; and proof of intentional copying by the defendant." Finally, one place to get all the court documents we need. Signed by Judge James Larson on 9/17/09. Id. 3-5.) 2548; Matsushita Elec. 83, Filing (Martin, James) (Filed on 12/11/2009) Modified on 12/14/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). He further stated that the location of Plaintiff's business "was very much part and parcel" to its decision to adopt "Sand Hill Advisors" as its name. M2 Software, Inc. v. Madacy, 421 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir.2005). No. STRUCK IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, 7/8/2021: Memorandum of Points & Authorities, 7/21/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF DENIS SHMIDT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS AND CROSS-DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT ADAM B. 2021-11-08. Sleekcraft, 599 F.2d at 353. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. The most favorable inference that may be drawn from the record regarding the similarities in the parties' services is that both, in a broad sense, have some connection to "real estate." Filing 92. WebCase No. (Hill Decl. UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy. WebThe Michigan Supreme Court is providing the information on this website as a public service. Notwithstanding that finding, the Court disagrees with Defendant that Plaintiff's arguments were "frivolous." (Dhillon, Jas) (Filed on 1/29/2009) Modified on 1/30/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). There's always a lot to do, and even more to learn. (mejlc1, COURT STAFF) Modified on 6/2/2010. Given that Plaintiff and Defendant used the same mark in the same general geographical area, Plaintiff's position that the parties' simultaneous use of the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark was likely to cause confusion was certainly arguable. Though acknowledging that Defendant had used the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark sometime after its formation in 1999, Plaintiff argued that such use was insufficient to show "use in commerce" for trademark purposes. (Entered: 05/21/2009), CERTIFICATION OF MEDIATION Session 5/19/2009, case not settled, no follow up contemplated, mediation complete. But, advertising, standing alone, does not establish secondary meaning. "This acquired distinctiveness is generally called `secondary meaning.'" at 67:24-68:3; Williams Decl. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 2/20/09. 3-5 d), filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC, Sand Hill Advisors LLC. See Levi Strauss & Co. v. Blue Bell, Inc., 778 F.2d 1352, 1358 (9th Cir.1985) ("[Levi] Strauss was required to prove that the tab as used on shirts had acquired secondary meaning by 1976, when Blue Bell began using a protruding label on shirts."). Mar. And how much will banks have to pay? (Id.). However, descriptive marks may acquire distinctiveness through use in commerce. The messaging organization is providing a sandbox for developers to enable cross-border transactions for central bank digital currencies, an elusive goal as most central banks focus on domestic use. Def. (Id. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 11/19/09. (Davidson Decl. 's Mot. 1979). 10 0 obj <> endobj ), Since its founding in 1982, Plaintiff has undergone a number of name changes. In general, the same analytical framework applies to infringement claims, irrespective of whether the marks or names are registered with the PTO. Brenda received a B. (Davidson Reply Decl. Sand Hill Global Advisors manages $3.6 billion and provides investment advisory services for 433 clients (1:31 advisor/client ratio). at 1218. Such services include investment planning, retirement and estate planning and philanthropic strategies. DocketAnswer; Filed by: Adam B. Case Management Conference set for 2/10/2009 04:00 PM. Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System. In its motion, Defendant contends that Plaintiff cannot demonstrate that "Sand Hill Advisors" is a protectable mark or that Defendant's use of the mark is likely to confuse the public. 0000002307 00000 n (Opp'n at 13-14.) Id. As the Magistrate correctly found, Mr. Conway merely stated that he recalled having raised the issue of seeking trademark protection with co-founder Jane Williams and the company's outside counsel. WebSAND HILL GLOBAL ADVISORS, LLC ( CRD # 111295/SEC#:801-58002 ) SAND HILL ADVISORS, INC., SAND HILL GLOBAL ADVISORS, LLC, SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC., SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC. Forschner Group, Inc. v. Arrow Trading Co., Inc., 30 F.3d 348, 355 (2d Cir.1994) (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, there is no dispute that Sand Hill can be construed to mean that Plaintiff is an advisory firm based in the Sand Hill areaand indeed, that name was selected by Plaintiff because they, in fact, were then located on Sand Hill Road. Sciences v. eBay, Inc., 511 F.3d 966, 969 (9th Cir.2007). (Entered: 12/22/2009), Proposed Order re 36 Motion for Summary Judgment by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. A descriptive mark may be subject to protection under the Lanham Act if it has acquired a secondary meaning. The Fiduciary Network-affiliated firm revealed on Wednesday that it had accessed the funds through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). ), As a result of Plaintiff's inability to register the name "Sand Hill Advisors LLC" with the California Secretary of State, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court on November 4, 2008, alleging a single claim for service mark infringement under the Lanham Act. 1986). Applied Info. (McCaffrey Depo. 0000001331 00000 n Ex. WebSAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiff, vs. Defendant is a California limited liability company located in Los Altos, California, formed by business partners Bert Sandell and Albert Hill, Jr. Messrs. Sandell and Hill filed their Limited Liability Company Articles of Organization with the California Secretary of State on April 27, 1999. Only admissible evidence may be considered in ruling on a motion for motion for summary judgment. Defendant now moves this Court for a de novo determination of the Magistrate's recommendation, and requests that the Court grant its motion for attorneys' fees. Docketof Court Order Continuing CMC; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. 16-20 and Exs. 84. In opposing Defendant's summary judgment motion, Plaintiff argued that the presumption applied because it allegedly has been using the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark exclusively and continuously since March 29, 1995, and that Defendant did not begin using the mark until 2005, which more than five years after Plaintiff's date of first use. Co., 704 F.2d 1575, 1577 (Fed.Cir.1983) (common use of "DRC" mark not likely to cause confusion where products were "quite distinct"). %PDF-1.4 Motion Hearing set for 2/23/2010 01:00 PM in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Oakland. 42. Bank groups say the focus on capital rules in Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michael Barr's report on Silicon Valley Bank are misguided. 5.) In general, there are three ways in which a plaintiff can establish that it has a protectable interest in a service mark or trademark: "(1) it has a federally registered mark in goods or services; (2) its mark is descriptive but has acquired a secondary meaning in the market; or (3) it has a suggestive mark, which is inherently distinctive and protectable." 64. at 10-11. 2007). Declaration of Albert R. Hill, Jr. in Support of 36 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed bySand Hill Advisors LLC. Thus, in a federal infringement action, the holder of the registered mark may rely on section 2(f) to show acquired distinctiveness (i.e., secondary meaning) as of the date of registration. In addition, the record does not support Defendant's assertion that the only reason Plaintiff filed suit was to "force it to surrender its business registration" in California. A subscription to PACER is required. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 1/22/10. 47 0 obj<>stream 69, Filing Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 2/16/10.
Penn State Athletics Marketing Internship,
Dear Harriette Uexpress,
Use Transmitter Pocket To Start Chevy Cruze 2017,
Alkaline Water For Dogs With Cancer,
Articles S
