The U.S. Trademark Office issued the following 213 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in February 2025 based on applications filed by Indiana trademark attorneys:
| Registration Number | Wordmark |
| 7692346 | MAKE YOUR DREAMS TAKE FLIGHT |
| 7676658 | TRAVELIN |
| 7679708 | ROLL TO ONE |
| 7694786 | FOUNDER’S COLLEGE AT BUTLER UNIVERSITY |
| 7689609 | STEELTOWN |
| 7697199 | PROTRONIX |
| 7688162 | ISF SIGNS |
Plaintiffs Inpres, Inc. and TWM IP LLC have filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Alltrista Plastics LLC concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,585,460 (the “‘460 Patent”). The plaintiffs allege that the defendant has infringed upon the ‘460 Patent, which relates to a screw-based dispenser system with a locking elevator mechanism, and is seeking relief, including damages and an injunction. The plaintiffs claim that the defendant’s products unlawfully replicate the patented technology and that the infringement has been willful.
The accused patent, titled “Screw-Based Dispenser Having Locking Elevator and Elevator Retention Mechanism,” was issued on March 7, 2017. It specifically addresses issues with propel/repel dispensers used for consumer products such as lip balms and creams, particularly solving a problem known as “up-elevator,” where the elevator mechanism in the dispenser advances too soon.
According to the Complaint, Alltrista, operating as Jarden Plastics in 2018, purchased a large quantity of lip balm dispensers from Inpres, which incorporated the patented elevator retention mechanism. Alltrista was provided detailed specifications and engineering drawings by Inpres under confidentiality agreements, highlighting the proprietary nature of the materials. However, after returning most of the purchased units, Alltrista allegedly used these specifications to develop its own dispensers incorporating the patented technology.
Catalyst Medium Four Inc. (operating as Smartish) has filed a lawsuit against Scooch, LLC, accusing them of unfair competition. Smartish claims that Scooch has been selling mobile phone cases that closely resemble Smartish’s distinctive designs, particularly those from its popular “Wallet Slayer” series. The lawsuit argues that Scooch is trying to take advantage of Smartish’s years of innovation and marketing efforts by selling cases with similar designs and packaging.
According to the Complaint, Smartish, based in Austin, Texas, has been designing and selling mobile phone cases since 2011. The unique design of its “Wallet Slayer” series, with a thumb-out cut on the left for easy pocket access and a card slot on the right, has led consumers to associate this feature with Smartish. The Wallet Slayer has been a key product, with hundreds of thousands of units sold each year, backed by millions spent on advertising across platforms like Amazon, Walmart, and eBay.
Smartish argues that Scooch’s Moneymate case closely mimics the design and look of the Wallet Slayer, creating a risk of consumer confusion. The lawsuit claims that Scooch’s product
may mislead customers into thinking it is connected to or endorsed by Smartish. The marketing images used by Scooch are also said to closely resemble those used by Smartish, adding to the potential for confusion.
RestoPros Franchising, LLC, a North Carolina-based company specializing in restoration and mold remediation services, has filed a lawsuit against Indiana company, SFTS Services, Inc. and its owners, Dale L. Bailey and Brandy M. Bailey. The lawsuit accuses the Baileys of trademark infringement, deceptive trade practices, and breaching their franchise agreement with RestoPros. Specifically, RestoPros alleges that the Baileys used its registered trademark “RESTOPROS” and confidential business information to launch a competing business, “Restore and Renew Professionals,” after leaving the RestoPros franchise. The Baileys are also accused of improperly using RestoPros’ branding, phone numbers, and customer reviews for the new business, while failing to adhere to various terms of the franchise agreement, including payments and territorial restrictions.
Despite multiple cease-and-desist requests, the Defendants reportedly ignored RestoPros’ attempts to settle the matter outside of court. RestoPros is seeking damages for breach of contract, trademark infringement, unfair competition, and misappropriation of trade secrets. Additionally, the company is requesting an injunction to prevent the Defendants from continuing to use its trademarks or operate their competing business.
The case has been assigned to Judge Matthew P. Brookman and Magistrate Judge Kellie M. Barr in the U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana Case No. 1:24-cv-02171.
Christopher Sadowski, a photojournalist from New Jersey, has filed a lawsuit against Fortner Services Inc., operating as Fortner Pest Control, for alleged copyright infringement. Sadowski, who has been published in various prominent outlets, including the New York Post and USA Today, has built a reputation not only for his award-winning photography but also for his diligent efforts to protect his intellectual property. Over the years, he has filed multiple copyright infringement claims against various parties for unauthorized use of his work (See previous blog posts about these suits here, here, here, and here.).
As a self-employed photographer, Sadowski owns the rights to his work and licenses his photographs under terms that retain his copyright. The current suit states that in 2022, Sadowski created a photograph titled “112120rat5CS,” which was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office in December 2022. The photograph was later licensed to the New York Post and appeared in an article, with appropriate attribution to Sadowski.
Fortner Services, a pest control company based in Bedford, Indiana, operates a website and maintains a presence on social media. On December 13, 2023, Fortner allegedly displayed Sadowski’s
copyrighted photograph on its website and social media without obtaining permission. Sadowski claims that Fortner did not contact him to request a license for use of the image, which was intended for commercial purposes.
BTL Industries, Inc. (BTL) has filed a lawsuit against Be Minked Beauty & Company LLC and its owner, Britney Humphrey, accusing them of patent infringement, trademark infringement, and unfair competition. BTL, based in Massachusetts, develops and sells technology used for body-contouring treatments. Their EMSCULPT® and EMSCULPT NEO® devices use electromagnetic energy to tone muscles and have become leaders in the aesthetic industry.
According to the Complaint BTL holds a patent (Patent No. 10,478,634) for the technology used in these devices and has multiple registered trademarks for names like EMSCULPT® and HIFEM®. The company alleges that Be Minked is selling a device called the “Emsculpt RF Machine” that infringes on BTL’s patent. Additionally, BTL says Be Minked is using their trademarked names, such as “EMSCULPT” and “HIFEM,” without permission on their website.
BTL reportedly sent Be Minked a cease & desist letter about the infringement but says the company ignored it. BTL is now asking the
court to stop Be Minked from using its patented technology and trademarks, and they want financial damages, including a minimum of $125,000 for the alleged patent violation. They’re also asking for a permanent ban on Be Minked using any of BTL’s trademarks or confusingly similar names and for the company to pay for BTL’s legal fees. BTL is also seeking to shut down Be Minked’s website and freeze their bank accounts.
The U.S. Trademark Office issued the following 265 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in January 2025 based on applications filed by Indiana trademark attorneys:
| Registration Number | Wordmark |
| 7642226 | IHTC |
| 7642235 | INDIANA BLOODWORX |
| 7642225 | |
| 7643084 | IT’S NOT NORMAL |
| 7643134 | THREE FLOYDS |
Zurcher Tire, Inc., a leading nationwide tire distributor based in Monroe, Indiana, has filed a lawsuit against Michael Boland, a former employee now living in Sturgis, Michigan. Boland worked for Zurcher as a sales representative from 2019 until his termination in 2024. During his time with the company, Boland had access to confidential business information, including customer lists, pricing, and other trade secrets that Zurcher goes to great lengths to protect.
Court documents show that after being informed in August 2024 that his employment would end due to policy violations, Boland remained on the payroll through October 18, 2024, but he deleted 146 emails containing sensitive company information. Shortly after, Boland began discussions with North Gateway Tire, a competitor, about a potential job. Zurcher alleges that Boland sent North Gateway detailed customer and pricing information while still employed by Zurcher, offering to use his connections to benefit the competitor.
Boland officially started working for North Gateway in November 2024, just days after allegedly sharing Zurcher’s proprietary information. Zurcher claims that Boland’s actions, combined with North Gateway’s use of the data, have unfairly hurt its business.
Uriah Products, LLC has filed a lawsuit against CURT Manufacturing LLC for patent infringement. Uriah, a Missouri-based company that has been making and selling trailer parts since 2004, claims CURT is violating its rights under U.S. Patent No. 10,857,846. This patent, issued in December 2020, protects an adjustable hitch assembly used in towing equipment, such as Uriah’s popular Aluma-Tow Hitch Ball Mount.
According to Uriah, CURT is selling similar products under its Alumalite Adjustable Aluminum Hi
tch line, which include models with varying drop sizes. Uriah argues these products infringe on key features of the ‘846 patent. It also states that CURT’s products are almost identical to its own, apart from size differences and the distances between the top of the hitch and ball mount of the hitch.
In the lawsuit, Uriah is asking the court to declare that CURT has infringed on the patent, to stop CURT from selling the infringing products, and to award damages for the harm caused. Uriah also wants the court to order CURT to pay its legal fees and any additional relief the court finds appropriate.
Indiana-based companies, Banjo Corporation and Green Leaf, Inc., are again in litigation over their crossing business of manufacturing and selling valves and pipe fittings. The original complaint brought forth by Banjo, still pending, was for trademark infringement with Green Leaf’s use of the color yellow on their liquid handling valves. Now Green Leaf is suing Banjo for the use of domain names and trademarks. According to the complaint, Green Leaf has consistently used its registered United States federal trademarks, Green Leaf® and TerreMax®, to identify its products in commerce. Green Leaf’s various word marks and a design mark are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office under Nos. 2,642,074, 6,901,382 and 2,642,068.
Green Leaf claims that committed trademark infringement and cyberpiracy by registering several domain names identical or confusingly similar to Green Leaf’s trademarks, including but not limited to the domain names greenleafvalve.com and terremaxvalve.com. It is alleged that these domain names were registered in 2019 by Banjo for the purpose of redirecting consumers to Banjo’s website. Green Leaf insists that Banjo acted in bad faith, attempting to ride on the coattails of good will established by Green Leaf® and TerreMax®.
The complaint also alleges that Banjo renewed these domain names in 2024, continuing to possess the domain names and continuing to divert consumers through them until November of that year. Once the diversion ceased, Green Leaf moved to amend an existing lawsuit with a cyberpiracy counterclaim. The motion was denied, but the court indicated it could bring the claim in a separate action, which it has now done.
