We successfully obtained summary judgment in favor of our defendant-client who had been sued for alleged trademark infringement by Best Vacuum, Inc. of Illinois. Best Vacuum, Inc. contended that Ian De...sign, Inc.'s use of the domains "bestvacuumcleaner.com" and "bestchoicevacuums.com" infringed its alleged mark "best vacuum." Ian Design, Inc. opposed such allegations. On behalf of Ian Design, Inc., we also successfully defeated Best Vacuum's motion for preliminary injunction. In response to the Plaintiff filing its motion for summary judgment, we filed a cross motion for summary judgment. The trial court held that "best vacuum" was not a protectable mark.
Internet
Tamburo v. Dworkin, et al.
N/A
OUTCOME: Motion to Dismiss Granted
We represent all but one of the Defendants in a lawsuit brought by John Tamburo for alleged defamation and an assortment of additional claims. After using a robot program to copy the online databases f...rom some of the Defendants, Tamburo (through his corporation Versity Corporation) extracted the raw data (dog pedigree information) and incorporated the information into his own commercial pedigree database. Outraged, some of the Defendants complained of Tamburo's actions online and stated that their data had been stolen. Tamburo responded by filing litigation against them.
On behalf of the Defendants, we filed a Motion to Dismiss which the Court ultimately granted on the basis that Tamburo did not represent the true party in interest. After obtaining legal counsel, Tamburo, along with Versity Corporation, his dissolved corporation, filed a Fifth Amended Complaint. We again filed a Motion to Dismiss on a variety of grounds including, but not limited to, lack of personal jurisdiction and immunity provided to one of the Defendants under § 230.
In response to the Motion to Dismiss the Fifth Amended Complaint, Versity Corporation and John Tamburo filed a Sixth Amended Complaint. Our firm again filed a Motion to Dismiss on a variety of grounds including, but not limited to, lack of personal jurisdiction and immunity provided to one of the Defendants under § 230.
The Court granted our Motion to Dismiss the Sixth Amended Complaint concluding the Court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants. The Plaintiffs then filed a Motion to Vacate and Transfer seeking to vacate the dismissal and transfer the action to the Western District of Michigan. The Court denied this motion.
This matter is on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
