Damages

October 6, 2023

Nickels and Dimes Goes Full Tilt on Noah’s Arcade in Trademark Infringement Suit

Celina, Texas – Plaintiff, Nickels and Dimes Incorporated is suing LaPorte, Indiana company, Noah’s Arcade, LLC d/b/a Full Tilt, for infringement of its federally registered trademark TILT, in association with arcade, amusement, and entertainment services, under Section 32(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1).

According to the complaint, Plaintiff Nickels and Dimes opened their first TILT arcade in 1977, inside the Six Flags Mall, in Arlington, TX, and has since owned and operated 200 TILT arcades in the U.S. Nickels and Dimes states that it then began using the Trademark TILT STUDIO in 2010, and the TILTED 10 Trademark in 2021, in association with arcade games and indoor entertainment.

The Defendant, Noah’s Arcade, allegedly opened their arcade in 2022 under the mark FULL TILT and has been accused of using the mark in their marketing and advertising, to which the Plaintiff claims infringement of their trademarks TILT, TILT STUDIO, and TILTED 10. The Plaintiff argues that the products sold under Noah’s FULL TILT mark are identical or highly similar to those that Nickels and Dimes sell under their trademarks. In addition, the Plaintiff contends that Noah’s Domain Name is similar to Plaintiff’s TILT STUDIO and TILTED 10 marks, which could potentially cause confusion among the customer base who may assume an affiliation between the two entities.

September 29, 2023

Christopher Sadowski Claims Copyright Infringement for Award-Winning Photography

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

New Jersey – Plaintiff Christopher Sadowski is suing Defendant Restoration 1 By J&D, LLC, of New Palestine, Indiana, over violation of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 501, for allegedly reproducing, distributing, and publicly displaying Sadowski’s intellectual property for its own commercial purposes.

According to the claim, Sadowski is an award-winning photojournalist with 19 years of experience in documenting ordinary life and the human condition through photography. His work has been commissioned in magazines and newspapers such as the New York Post, Daily Mail Online, Reader’s Digest, USA Today, New York Times, Fox News, CBS News, NBC News, Boston Globe, Boston Herald, Los Angeles Times, Newsweek Magazine, and People Magazine. The complaint states that while the Plaintiff does sell limited, one-time use licenses to customers, he always retains copyright ownership of the photographs.

The suit accuses Restoration 1, a property damage restoration company, of using Sadowski’s photograph of Christmas lights on the Restoration 1 website without the proper licensing or permission to do so. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant has never been licensed to use the photograph and upon learning of its unauthorized use, the Defendant has not been willing to negotiate a reasonable license for it. Furthermore, the complaint states that Restoration 1 displays a copyright disclaimer (“Copyright © 2017”) on the page of the website that contains the photo, allegedly asserting that Restoration 1 owns the rights to everything on the webpage, including the photo in question.

September 22, 2023

Dillon Construction Group Files Copyright Infringement Suit Against Andretti Global Construction Team

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Hamilton County, Indiana– The Plaintiffs, DCG Indiana, Inc. d/b/a Dillon Construction Group, filed suit against Cardinal XLIII, LLC (Delaware); Motorsport Real Estate Ventures LLC (Delaware); Studio M Architecture and Planning, LLC (Indiana); Gradex, Inc. (Indiana); and Glenmark Construction Co. Inc. (Indiana) in part, for copyright infringement of works of original authorship.

According to the complaint, in early 2022, Andretti Global hired the Plaintiff and the Defendants to design and construct a racing facility in Fishers, IN. The parties then entered into a Design-Build Contract, which included financial terms, budgets, building plans, completion dates, etc. The Plaintiffs also claim that the contract granted Cardinal a limited, irrevocable, and nonexclusive license to use the drawings, specifications, calculations, etc. (Instruments of Service) created by DCG, while also maintaining that DCG was the author and owner of said Instruments of Service, and would, therefore, retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including copyrights. More importantly, the claim states that the contract specified that should Cardinal not substantially perform its obligations, including payment of any past-due fees to DCG, the copyright license granted to Cardinal would automatically terminate. (Click to read the cited part of the Design-Build Contract.)

According to the Plaintiff, on March 10, 2023, Cardinal notified DCG that it would be terminating the Design-Build Contract. At the time the Plaintiff claims Cardinal still owed them $1,011.462.21, which, according to the terms of the Design-Build Contract, meant the copyright license granted to Cardinal should have ceased. However, the Plaintiff alleges that Cardinal continued to use DCG’s Instruments of Service after the illegal termination of the contract and even after receiving cease-and-desist letters from Plaintiff’s counsel.

September 19, 2023

Agricultural Machinery Manufacturing Company (Par-Kan) Sued for Alleged Patent Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Kalida, Ohio – The Plaintiff, UNVERFERTH MFG. CO., INC., filed suit against Silver Lake, Indiana company, PAR-KAN CO., LLC for patent infringement under U.S. Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 281, 283, 284, and 285.

According to the complaint, Unverferth manufactures, uses, and sells seed tender products protected by legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,967,940 (“the ’940 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 9,745,123 (“the ’123 patent”). In accordance with statutory marking provision of 35U.S.C. § 287(a), Unverferth has affixed serial numbers to its products to identify the patents used in those products.

The Plaintiff claims that Par-Kan had knowledge of the ‘940 and ‘123 patents because these patents are continuations of U.S. Patent No. 8,221,047, which Unverferth sued Par-Kan over in a similar infringement case in 2013 and had received subpoenas and a cease-and-desist letter, identifying the patents by numbers. It is alleged that the Defendant continues to manufacture, use, and sell products that infringe on the claims of the ‘940 and ‘123 patents, which constitutes willful infringement.

March 28, 2023

Fireworks Company Takes On Competitors For Stealing Their Spark

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Muncie, Indiana – The Plaintiff, 1.4g Holdings, LLC (“1.4g”), filed suit against North Central Industries, Great Grizzly, Inc. and R. Brown, Inc. for Trademark and Trade Dress Infringement, as well as False Designation of Origin under 15 U.S.C. § 1125 and Misappropriation of Commercial Properties Under Indiana Common Law.

1.4g Holdings, LLC is a company that produces and sells consumer fireworks under the brand name ‘76 Pro Line. Per their website, ’76 Pro Line’s mission is to provide high quality 1.54g fireworks for hobbyists, enthusiasts, professional shooters, and display companies. ’76 Pro Line items have been featured in displays and product demonstrations at several annual events including Western Winter Blast, Pyrotechnics Guild International, Cobra-Con, and the National Fireworks Association Expo.

North Central Industries, Great Grizzly, Inc. and R. Brown, Inc. (“NCI”) are companies that also produce and sell consumer fireworks. According to its website, NCI is a second-generation, family-owned direct importer and wholesaler of customer 1.4G fireworks. With over 68 years of experience, they serve every pyro need with two distribution points in Muncie, Indiana and Forest Park, Georgia.

March 17, 2023

Alleged Deceptive Practices Result in Award Going to Wrong Business

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Fort Wayne, Indiana –The Plaintiff, Roller Ready, LLC, filed suit against Defendants, LA Systems, LLC d/b/a Monkey Rung and Paul Kiley for participating in false marketing practices, violating the Indiana Deceptive Trade Practices Act, engaging in unfair competition under Indiana common law, and infringing on Roller Ready’s trademark.

Roller Ready, LLC is a company that manufactures and sells rollers for various purposes, including painting, cleaning, and home improvement projects. Roller Ready was founded in 2013 by a group of entrepreneurs who identified a need for a more efficient and effective way to clean paint rollers. The founders developed a new product that would allow users to clean paint rollers quickly and easily. The product, called the Roller Ready System, is a self-contained unit that allows users to clean paint rollers with a minimal amount of water and effort.

Monkey Rung is a product development company that is marketed by LA Systems, LLC which is owned and operated by Paul Kiley.

March 14, 2023

Vandor Group Inc. Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Batesville Casket Company

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Richmond, Indiana –The Plaintiff, Vandor Group, Inc. (“Vandor”) doing business as Starmark Cremation Products, filed suit against Defendant, Batesville Casket Company, Inc. (“Batesville”), for patent infringement.

Vandor was established in 1972 by Bruce Elder in Richmond, Indiana. Vandor began by specializing in custom die-cutting of chipboard and corrugated fiberboard components. Starmark Cremation Products began in 2004 designing and marketing a small line of engineered cremation solutions. According to their website and social media pages, today Starmark manufacturers hundreds of alternative containers and rental inserts daily. They have designed, marketing and manufactured Sensible Solutions for its customers. Starmark prides itself on providing innovative, affordable and high quality products so that their customer can focus on the things that matter most; giving all families the opportunity to lay their loved ones to rest in an affordable yet dignified and respectful manner.

March 7, 2023

Local Medical Supply Store Sued for Selling Counterfeit Products

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana –The Plaintiff, BTL Industries, Inc. filed suit against Defendant, JV Medical Supplies, Inc. for trademark infringement, false advertising and patent infringement.

BTL Industries, founded in 1993, is a leading manufacturer of non-invasive medical devices that are used for cosmetic and therapeutic purposes. The company holds several patents and trademarks related to its products, including its flagship product, the EMSCULPT device. The EMSCULPT is a non-invasive medical device designed to stimulate muscle contraction using electromagnetic energy. The device is used for body contouring, muscle strengthening, and rehabilitation. The FDA has cleared EMSCULPT for non-invasive treatment for the abdomen, buttocks, arms, calves and thighs.

JV Medical Supplies, a competitor of BTL Industries, also manufactures a similar medical device called the Muscle Stimulator. The Muscle Stimulator is marketed and sold as a non-invasive device that uses electromagnetic energy to stimulate muscle contraction, and it is intended for use in body contouring and muscle strengthening applications. The Indiana Secretary of State indicates that the corporation was created in 2021.

February 23, 2023

Former Employees and their New Employer Sued Over Stolen Software

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Evansville, Indiana – The Plaintiff, MaddenCo, Inc. (“MaddenCo”) filed suit against former employees, James Reed (“Reed”) and Dru Darby (“Darby”) along with their new employer HG Autotech LLC (“HG Autotech”) for Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duties, Tortious Interference, Copyright Infringement, False Advertising, False Representations, False Designations of Origin, Reverse Passing Off and Unfair Competition.

Per Plaintiff’s website, MaddenCo is a privately held family business and has been for over 40 years. They develop and support integrated software systems for tire dealers and truck stop service centers. MaddenCo provides systems for retail, wholesale, commercial and retreading operations for independent tire dealers, and retail and commercial solutions for service centers for truck stops, with full integration to their own accounts payable and general ledger solutions. MaddenCo owns Copyright Registration Number TX0009171151 entitled “The Tire Dealer System” with an effective registration date of August 26, 2022.

February 21, 2023

Central Illinois Railroad Sues Former Employee for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Crowne Point, Indiana – The Plaintiff, Illinois Central Railroad (“IC”) filed suit against Defendant and former employee, Michael Belcher (“Belcher”) for Breach of Contract, Breach of Duty of Loyalty, Civil Conversion, Indiana Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Defend Trade Secrets Act, and Trespass to Chattels.

Per the Plaintiff’s website, IC is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, and has been in business for 148 years. Its Slogan, “The Main Line of Mid-America,” perfectly describes its unique north-south routing running from Chicago to the Gulf Coast.

According to the complaint, the Defendant, Michael Belcher (“Belcher”) is a resident of Crown Point Indiana. He was employed as a Senior Manager for IC for 20 years until he was terminated on October 19, 2022. Belcher’s duties included writing software code for IC’s financial data systems that included, but was not limited to, IC’s systems for financial metrics, financial records, and compliance. Belcher served as the key point of contact for financial analysis, performance tracking, and corrective action related to Basic Capital budgets for all levels of Engineering management. He also participated in IC’s Share Units Plan and was awarded Performance Share Units (“PSUs”). Each time he was awarded PSUs, he received and accepted an award letter that contained a Confidentiality Clause. This prohibited him from revealing, disclosing or making known any Confidential Information without prior written consent from IC. Belcher also received regular training on the Company’s Code of Business Conduct that requires every employee to safeguard Company assets and intellectual property. The Code of Conduct also contained provisions defining Company Confidential Information, and prohibitions against disclosure.