INND News

March 17, 2025

Granger, Indiana Entrepreneur Zachary Richard Zellers Sues Over Trademark Infringement, Faces Legal Hurdles in Federal Court

Granger, Indiana – Zachary Richard Zellers has filed a lawsuit against Diz Jackson and two unknown defendants, using “John Doe” as placeholders, claiming they are using his trademark “DJ Zman” without permission. Zellers, who claims to own the trademark through his DJ, Audio/Visual, and stage production business, DJ ZMAN LLC, argues the defendants’ use of the name online and on social media is damaging his brand and constitutes trademark infringement. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, includes documents showing that Indiana officially issued the trademark in question to DJ ZMAN LLC on February 20, 2025.

However, Judge Damon R. Leichty responded to the complaint, highlighting several issues with Zellers’ self-filed case. He explained that Zellers, who requested a waiver for filing fees due to financial hardship, did not meet the necessary legal requirements for a trademark infringement case. The judge noted that Zellers failed to provide enough detail about the harm caused and emphasized that the trademark belongs to DJ ZMAN LLC, not Zellers personally. Therefore, the lawsuit should be filed by the company, which must also be represented by a lawyer in court.

The court also noted that Zellers cannot use “John Doe” placeholders for the unknown defendants. Instead, he or the company must identify the defendants and provide their details. Judge Leichty gave Zellers until March 28, 2025, to amend his complaint and comply with the required legal procedures. Zellers was also informed he could reapply to have the court waive his fees after making the necessary changes.

March 14, 2025

Fortress Iron L.P. Digs Into Legal Action Against Digger Specialties for Alleged Patent Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Fortress Iron L.P. filed a lawsuit against Digger Specialties, Inc. for patent infringement, alleging that Digger’s Westbury VertiCable Aluminum Railing violates Fortress’s U.S. Patents 11,643,838 (the “‘838 Patent”) and 12,180,735 (the “‘735 Patent”). The complaint states that Fortress, a Texas-based company, is the owner of the patents protecting its FortressCable V-Series steel cable railing systemv. Meanwhile, the court documents assert that Digger, based in Indiana, produces a similar product and has reportedly continued to sell it despite being notified of the alleged infringement.

The lawsuit claims that Digger’s product infringes on the patents, particularly regarding features such as the design of vertical cable barriers and adjustable end members for tension control. Fortress seeks monetary damages, treble damages for willful infringement, and an injunction to stop Digger from continuing to sell the infringing product.

The case has been assigned to Judge Damon R. Leichty and Magistrate Judge Scott J. Frankel in the U.S. District Court of Northern Indiana Case No. 3:25-cv-00099.

March 10, 2025

Virginia Photographer Files Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Against Indiana Company Premier Aquascapes LTD for Unauthorized Use of Image

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Plaintiff Morgan Howarth, through his legal counsel, filed a complaint against Defendant Premier Aquascapes LTD for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §101 et seq. According to the complaint, Howarth, a professional photographer based in Virginia, owns the rights to a photograph of a luxury backyard pool and has commercial licensing rights for its online and print use.

Premier Aquascapes, an Indiana landscaping company, operates multiple social media accounts, including “premiereaquascapes” on Facebook, “@PremiereAqua” on X (formerly Twitter), and “@premiereaqua” on Facebook. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant used his Photograph without permission, violating U.S. copyright laws.

Court documents claim the Photograph was registered with the United States Copyright Office (USCO) on January 19, 2017. Despite Plaintiff’s attempts to resolve the issue in October and November 2024, the Defendant allegedly continued to infringe on the work, resulting in harm to the Photograph’s commercial market.

February 14, 2025

BTL Industries Files Lawsuit Against Be Minked Beauty for Patent and Trademark Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

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.

February 10, 2025

Zurcher Tire Sues Former Employee Over Alleged Trade Secret Theft and Competitor Dealings

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

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.

February 7, 2025

A Legal Hitch: Uriah Products, LLC Sues CURT Manufacturing LLC Over Trailer Part Patent Dispute

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

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.

January 31, 2025

Plaintiff Jumpstart Communications LLC Files Complaint Against Former CEO for Alleged Misconduct, Trademark Infringement, and Fraudulent Activities

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Plaintiff Jumpstart Communications LLC has filed a complaint against Defendants Ryan V. Jumper and Jumpstart Communication LLC, for alleged misconduct and violations of federal law. According to the complaint, Defendant Jumper, a founding member and former CEO of Jumpstart Communications, established a competing company with a similar name and logo, allegedly to harm the business he co-founded. The complaint describes a series of actions by Defendant Jumper, including unauthorized access to business accounts, misappropriation of funds, and attempts to divert customers, employees, and resources to the competing entity.

Jumpstart Communications is a telecommunications construction company that is headquartered in Indiana and was founded in 2020. It reportedly rapidly expanded its operations to several states and booked over $10 million in revenue in 2023. However, the complaint describes how Defendant Jumper’s behavior became erratic, beginning in April 2024, with accusations of theft, unauthorized password changes, and siphoning of funds from company accounts. Defendant Jumper is also accused of taking deliberate steps to interfere with the company’s operations, such as locking out other members from critical business systems and submitting fabricated documents.

The complaint further alleges that Defendant Jumper formed a competing entity, Jumpstart Communication LLC, which operates in the same territories using a similar brand as Jumpstart Communications and then misled customers and business partners by taking payments and resources and even went so far as to commit fraudulent acts such as filing false address changes with the U.S. Postal Service and IRS.

January 3, 2025

Magpul Sues Elite Tactical Systems over Alleged Patent Infringement Over Polymer Ammo Magazines

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Magpul Sues Elite Tactical Systems over Alleged Patent Infringement Over Polymer Ammo Magazines

Magpul Industries Corporation has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against fellow firearm accessories manufacturer Elite Tactical Systems Group, LLC. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant has infringed upon U.S. Patents Nos. 8,991,086 and 9,746,264. Magpul claims that the defendant made, used, sold, imported, and offered polymer ammunition magazines that infringe on these patents for sale. Specifically, the defendant’s products, including the ETS 30rd 5.56x45mm NATO/.223 Remington polymer magazines, are said to incorporate the patented magazine architecture described in the ’086 and ’264 patents.

Magpul argues that the defendant’s actions are unlawful and are causing harm to its exclusive patent rights. The lawsuit seeks damages, including potential treble damages, a permanent injunction to prevent further infringement, the destruction of infringing products, attorney’s fees, and other legal remedies.

December 6, 2024

Protecting the LEGACY: Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Filed Against Legacy Family Chiropractic

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Legacy Chiropractic, LLC, has filed a complaint against Legacy Family Chiropractic LLC, alleging trademark infringement, unfair competition, and related claims. The complaint centers around Defendant’s alleged unauthorized use of the “LEGACY” trademark, which Plaintiff asserts is integral to its business and reputation. Since 2018, Plaintiff has operated Legacy Chiropractic in Shipshewana, Indiana, building a strong reputation for quality care, and the LEGACY mark has become a valuable asset attracting patients from across the U.S. and Canada.

The complaint states that despite Plaintiff’s established use of the LEGACY mark, Defendant, based in Warsaw, Indiana, began offering chiropractic services under the same name. In late 2019 or early 2020, Rebekah Franklin, the wife of Defendant’s CEO, contacted Plaintiff to inquire about purchasing the trademark, but Plaintiff declined. Defendant subsequently opened its clinic in March 2020, continuing to use the LEGACY mark. Defendant also registered the domain mylegacyfamilychiro.com in June 2020, incorporating the mark further into its marketing. Plaintiff claims that this has caused market confusion and that Defendant was aware of Plaintiff’s prior trademark rights.

Plaintiff’s legal claims include violations of the Lanham Act for trademark infringement and unfair competition, along with claims of cybersquatting due to Defendant’s use of the domain name. Plaintiff also seeks relief under Indiana state law for unfair competition and requests the cancellation of Defendant’s state trademark registration for “LEGACY FAMILY CHIROPRACTIC,” arguing it was obtained in bad faith.

November 18, 2024

Sexologist Caitlin V. Neal Takes Legal Action Against Anonymous E-Commerce Merchant for Unauthorized Use of Likeness

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Caitlin V. Neal, a prominent sexologist and sexual health coach, has filed a lawsuit against an e-commerce merchant based in China for using her likeness without consent to promote its products. Neal, who has built a significant online presence across platforms like YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook, alleges that the defendant used her image in online ads for adult wellness products she does not endorse. Neal’s legal complaint centers on false endorsement under the Lanham Act and misappropriation of her right of publicity under Indiana law.

What makes this case particularly unusual is that the defendant’s identity is currently unknown. The complaint notes that “The name of the Point-of-Sale Site and other information that may be used to identify Defendant is being filed under seal. Plaintiff seeks leave to do so because Plaintiff intends to move for a temporary restraining order, through which the Court would impose a temporary asset freeze with respect to Defendant’s money transfer platform(s). In the absence of a temporary asset freeze, Plaintiff believes that Defendant would obtain advance notice of this suit and would transfer assets abroad, thereby frustrating this Court’s future rulings. Plaintiff also intends to seek expedited discovery, through which Plaintiff would receive additional information from third-party online marketplace platform(s) to further help identify Defendant.”

This suit reflects the challenges of pursuing legal action against anonymous or foreign entities in the digital age. Neal’s legal team is taking precautions to prevent the defendant from hiding assets abroad before a judgment can be made. Through the temporary restraining order and expedited discovery, they hope to uncover the defendant’s identity and ensure that any ruling in the case can be enforced.