New Litigation

June 3, 2011

Lisa Angle Sues Math-U-See, Inc. et al. for Copyright Infringement of Home Schooling Curriculum Materials

South Bend, IN – Copyright lawyers for Susan Lynch, of Indiana, Math-U-See Indiana, Inc. of Indiana, and Lisa and Jim Angle, of Idaho, filed a breach of contract and copyright infringement suit alleging Math-U-See, Inc. of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and Steve and Ethan Demme infringed the works CALCULUS WORKS, RECORDED CALCULUS LESSONS, HONORS BOOKS, PRE-CALCULUS WORKS, ALGEBRA 2 AND QUIZ WORKS, and TEST BOOKLETS.

The complaint alleges that Steve Demme owns Math-U-See, Inc. and invented the Math-U-See curriculum for home schooling parents in the early 1990s. Steve Demme used a business model of having individual representatives and distributors to sell the Math-U-See curriculum. The plaintiffs were “Reps,” and Plaintiff Lisa Angle also wrote additional material for Math-U-See, which are the copyrighted works that the copyright infringement claim is based upon. The complaint alleges that Sue Lynch was the Rep for Indiana and Illinois beginning in 1996 and built sales to hundreds of thousands of dollars by 2009. Lisa and Jim Angle were Reps for Montana, North Dakota, Alabama, and Tennessee. The complaint alleges that in 2010 Steve Demme, with help of Ethan Demme, ended the representative business model and cut the plaintiffs out of selling the Math-U-See curriculum. Ms. Angle claims that the Defendants continued to use the copyrighted materials she created after the agreement was terminated and without Ms. Angle’s permission. The complaint makes claims of breach of contract, breach of good faith, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of Indiana Franchise Act, violation of Illinois Franchise Act, violation of the Idaho Unfair Trade Practices Act, violation of Illinois Unfair Trade Practices Act, violation of Tennessee Unfair Trade Practices Act, Violation of Law 75 of Puerto Rico, tortuous interference with contract, tortuous interference with prospective business relations, wrongful conversion of customer list, promissory estoppel, unjust enrichment/quantum meruit, accounting and six counts of copyright infringement. The plaintiffs seek actual and punitive damages, an injunction prohibiting further distribution of the copyrighted works, costs and attorney fees.

Practice Tip: In this case, Ms. Angle claims she is the author and rightful owner of the copyrights to the works described in the complaint. She claims the defendants violated 17 U.S.C. 106 of the Copyright Act. Ms. Angle has not formally registered her copyrights with the US Copyright Office, however, this is not a necessity for her infringement claims to succeed. Rather, the Copyright Act provides that “Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work.”

June 1, 2011

KZRV, L.P. Sues RV Wholesalers, LLC for Trademark Infringement of Travel Trailers

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Fort Wayne, IN – Trademark lawyers for KZRV, L.P. of Shipshewana, Indiana filed a trademark infringement suit alleging RV Wholesalers, LLC of Lakeview, Ohio infringed Trademark Registration No. 3,183,731 for the mark SPREE registered with the US Trademark Office.

The complaint states that KZRV is a leading manufacturer of travel trailers and uses the SPREE trademark on some of the travel trailers it manufactures. KZRV alleges that on May 10, 2011, RV Wholesalers offered for sale on its website a travel trailer with the SPREE trademark without authorization from KZRV. KZRV asked RV Wholesalers to remove the item from their website, and RV Wholesalers refused. KZRV has made claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition, trademark dilution, common law unfair competition, and interference with business relationships. KZRV is seeking a preliminary injunction, a declaratory judgment, damages and costs.

Practice Tip: Accordingly KZRV’s website it uses a stylized form of SPREE with a large S and an arc in the upper right corner. According to the complaint, RV Wholesalers’ use of Spree is virtually identical. While it is possible that this is a case of a blatant infringement, it seems more likely that RV Wholesalers is simply selling authentic “Spree” RVs manufactured by KZRV. If this is the case, this may not be infringement, as the owner of a legitimate product generally has a right to refer to under its original trademark. Otherwise, if the person placing a classified ad to sell, for example, a used car, would be infringing the trademark of the car manufacturer if they identified the car by make and model.

This case has been assigned to Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen and Magistrate Judge Roger Cosbey in the Northern District of Indiana, and assigned Case No. 1:11-cv-00188-JVB-RBC.

May 20, 2011

Hard Drive Productions, Inc. Sues 21 Indiana John Does for Copyright Infringement of Adult Entertainment Video Via BitTorrent

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

New Albany, IN – A Copyright lawyer for Hard Drive Productions, Inc. of Phoenix, Arizona filed a copyright infringement suit alleging 21 unnamed John Does who reside in Indiana infringed the copyrighted video work entitled AMATEUR ALLURE – ERIN which has been registered by the US Copyright Office.

Hard Drive Productions is an adult entertainment company that produced the video at issue. The complaint alleges that the 21 John Does have unlawfully reproduced and/or distributed the copyrighted video using the BitTorrent “distribution protocol”. The complaint states that Hard Drive has the Internet Protocol address (“IP address”) of these 21 individuals and will learn their identities during discovery. Hard Drive has made claims of copyright infringement and civil conspiracy. The complaint seeks an order impounding all copies of the video, damages, and litigation expenses.

This case has been assigned to Judge Sarah Evans Barkerand Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned Case No. 4:11-cv-00059-SEB-WGH.

Practice Tip: As has been reported elsewhere, it appears the adult entertainment industry has adopted the copyright litigation strategy that the music industry used to halt online music sharing. Specifically, file sharing using the BitTorrent program is being targeted for litigation. According to one report, as of November 2010, over 16,000 anonymous BitTorrent users had been sued by the adult entertainment industry for illegally sharing copyrighted materials. Hard Drive Productions filed a similar lawsuit against 300 Illinois John Does late last year. Unlike the music industry copyright litigation, these individuals are likely to be greatly embarrassed when their identities are unveiled in the discovery phase of litigation.
Continue reading

May 19, 2011

Knauf Insulation Limited and Knauf Insulation GMBH Sue Certainteed Corporation for Patent Infringement of Insulation Technology

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, IN – Patent lawyers for Knauf Insulation Limited of St. Helens, Merseyside, United Kingdom and Knauf Insulation GMBH of Shelbyville, Indiana, filed a patent infringement suit alleging Certainteed Corporation of Valley Forge, Pennsylvania infringed Patent No. 7,854,980, FORMALDEHYDE-FREE MINERAL FIBRE INSULATION PRODUCT, which has been issued by the US Patent Office.

Patent attorneys for Knauf Insulation Limited filed a nearly identical lawsuit against Certainteed in February, which was reported on by Indiana Intellectual Property Law News. According to PACER records, in April Certainteed filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction claiming that Knauf Insulation Limited did not own the asserted patent. Certainteed claimed that Knauf Insulation Limited had transferred all its interest in the patent to Knauf GMBH of Indiana. As of the date that the new lawsuit was filed, the court had not ruled on Certainteed’s motion to dismiss. In the new lawsuit that was filed by Knauf’s patent attorney on May 19, Knauf asserts essentially identical claims and adds Knauf Insulation GMBH of Shelbyville as a plaintiff.

This case has been assigned to Judge Sarah Evans Barker and Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned Case No. 1:11-CV-00680-SEB-DML.

Practice Tip: It appears that Knauf is seeking to move this controversy forward without waiting for the court to decide Certainteed’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in the previously filed suit and any potential appeals of this decision. Knauf’s new complaint may be an attempt to fix the perceived problem with the previously filed suit. Knauf has alleged that the ongoing alleged infringement continues to cause it damages and is seeking an injunction. Knauf, therefore, appears to desire a speedy resolution on the merits of the infringement claim.
Continue reading

May 17, 2011

Noble Roman’s, Inc. Sues Findlay Tiffin Oil, LLC and Ayman Magdaddi for Trademark Infringement for Unauthorized Use of Trademark and Trade Dress

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, IN – Trademark lawyers for Noble Roman’s, Inc. of Indianapolis, Indiana filed a trademark infringement suit alleging Findlay Tiffin Oil, LLC of Tipp City, Ohio and Ayman Magdaddi of Aurora, Indiana infringed Trademark Registration No. 987,069 for the mark NOBLE ROMAN’S; Trademark Registration No. 1,920,428 for the mark THE BETTER PIZZA PEOPLE; and Trademark Registration No. 1,682,308 for the mark NOBLE ROMAN’S PIZZA, which are registered with the US Trademark Office.

The complaint alleges that Findlay owns a convenience store located in Aurora, Indiana and Mr. Magdaddi operates the convenience store. The convenience store was owned by a company called Duncan Oil until February 2011, and Duncan Oil operated a Noble Roman’s franchise on-site that used various trademarked items and trade dress. The complaint alleges that Duncan Oil was an authorized franchise of Noble Roman’s until the property was sold in February 2011. Findlay and Magdaddi, however, have not reached an agreement to be authorized to operate a Noble Roman’s franchise. The complaint alleges that a Noble Roman’s employee visited the store in March 2011 and observed pizza being sold using the Noble Roman’s trade dress and menu boards. The complaint states that on April 30, 2011, Duncan Oil recovered all the Noble Roman’s trademarked items and trade dress. Noble Roman’s trademark attorneys have made claims of trademark infringement and federal unfair competition.

This case has been assigned to Judge Tanya Walton Pratt and Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned Case No. 1:11-cv-00665-TWP-TAB.

Practice Tip: If a new owner of the franchise property wishes to continue operating the franchise, a new franchise agreement must be reached. If the new owner continues to use the franchise’s trademarked items and trade dress without authorization, a trademark infringement lawsuit may result. Noble Roman’s has been particularly aggressive in enforcing trademarks rights in franchise relationships.
Continue reading

May 16, 2011

Brandon S. Judkins Sues Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation for Design Patent Infringement of Table

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, IN – Brandon S. Judkins of Indianapolis, Indiana filed a patent infringement suit alleging Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation of New York, New York infringed Patent No. D591,090, FURNITURE ARTICLE, which has been issued by the US Patent Office. The patent in question is a design patent of a table.

The complaint alleges that Polo Ralph Lauren is importing, making, using, selling or offering for sale tables that infringe Mr. Judkin’s patent. Specifically, Mr. Judkins alleges that he has seen infringing tables at Macey’s and Carson Pirie Scott locations in Indianapolis. The complaint states that Polo Ralph Lauren is using the tables to display apparel at the stores. Mr. Judkins, an attorney, is representing himself in this case. Mr. Judkins seeks an injunction, declaratory judgment, damages, and costs.

This case has been assigned to Chief Judge Richard L. Young and Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned Case No. 1:11-cv-00661-RLY-DML.

Practice Tip: In 2008, the Federal Circuit clarified the test for infringement of design patents in Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. Swisa, Inc., 543 F.3d 665 (Fed. Cir. 2008). In that case, the court adopted the “ordinary observer” test to replace the “point of novelty” test. In the complaint here, the patented design appears to be pretty basic. The plaintiff may face an uphill battle.
Continue reading

May 13, 2011

WB Music Corp. et al. Sues Langel’s, Inc. and Its President for Copyright Infringement for Unauthorized Performance of Songs

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Hammond, IN – Copyright lawyers for WB Music Corporation and six other music companies filed a copyright infringement suit alleging Langel’s, Inc. of Highland, Indiana infringed three copyrighted songs. Specifically, the songs at issue are: VOGUE by Madonna, FALLIN by Alicia Keys, and HEART OF ROCK AND ROLL by Huey Lewis, all of which have been registered by the US Copyright Office. WB Music has also filed the claims against Rodney D. Langel, the president of Langel’s, Inc.

The complaint alleges that Langel’s owns and operates Rodney’s Sports Bar and Langel’s Pizza in Highland, Indiana. WB alleges that the three songs at issue were performed at these establishments without license from the copyright owners in May 2008. The plaintiffs in this suit are the owners of the rights to these songs. WB Music and the others allege that Langel’s Inc. and Mr. Langel had been warned by the American Society of Composers, Artists, and Publishers (ASCAP) about its liability for copyright infringement. The complaint makes three claims of copyright infringement pursuant 17 U.S.C. § 501.

Practice Tip: In this case, the plaintiffs have sued Mr. Langel, the president of Langel’s, Inc., personally. Copyright laws allow an officer of a corporation to be held liable for the corporation’s copyright infringement if the officer contributes to the infringement by inducing or encouraging the infringement. An officer can also be liable for copyright infringement if the officer supervises the infringing conduct and has a direct financial benefit from the infringement.

This case has been assigned to Judge Theresa Springmann and Magistrate Judge Paul Cherry in the Northern District of Indiana, and assigned case no. 2:11-cv-00166-TLS-PRC.
Continue reading

May 10, 2011

Tissue Extraction Devices, LLC Sues Hologic, Inc. and Suros Surgical Systems, Inc. for Patent Infringement of Breast Biopsy Device

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, IN – Patent lawyers for Tissue Extraction Devices, LLC of Indianapolis, Indiana filed a patent infringement suit alleging Hologic, Inc. of Bedford, Massachusetts and Suros Surgical Systems, Inc. of Indianapolis, Indiana infringed Patent No. 7,749,172, PNEUMATIC CIRCUIT, which has been issued by the US Patent Office.

The patent infringement complaint alleges that Jeff Schwindt, owner of Tissue Extraction Devices, invented the technology at issue, which is apparently a hand-piece used by doctors who are performing breast biopsies. Mr. Schwindt assigned the patent rights to Tissue Extraction Devices. The hand-piece allows the doctors to remove a tissue sample for biopsy. According to the complaint, Schwindt worked together with Suros to further develop the hand-piece. Schwindt, however, is the owner of the patent on the hand-piece. Suros introduced breast biopsy systems that included the hand-piece to the market under the names ATEC and EVIVA. Suros is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hologic. Tissue Extraction claims these two systems infringe upon the patent owned by Schwindt. Tissue Extraction’s patent infringement attorneys have requested a declaratory judgment that the patent has been infringed, damages, and attorney fees.

This case has been assigned to Judge Tanya Walton Pratt and Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned case no. 1:11-cv-00628-TWP-TAB.

Practice Tip: Based on the complaint, this lawsuit appears to be the result of a dispute between an inventor and another party who participated in some way in the development or marketing of the invention. This case illustrates the importance of having a clear agreement regarding intellectual property rights before parties begin working together to invent, develop and market a product.
Continue reading

May 4, 2011

New York Times Reports on Controversial Company That Enforces Copyrights Online

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

New York – The New York Times reported earlier this week on Righthaven, LLC, a company that has sued hundreds of bloggers for copyright violation. The N.Y. Times story profiles one such blogger, Brian Hill, a 20 year-old North Carolina resident, who was sued by Righthaven after he used a photo of an airport security pat-down on his blog. Righthaven has filed over 250 copyright infringement lawsuits since its founding in 2010, including 24 in March 2011. According to reports, its business model is to purchase assignments of copyrights from newspapers and similar organizations and then search for infringing web postings to sue their publishers.

A Google search on Righthaven reveals that there are numerous websites devoted to condemning Righthaven, calling the company “a bottom feeding legal outfit” and “copyright trolls.” As the N.Y. Times story reported, copyright attorneys have questioned whether the fair use doctrine might protect some of the bloggers sued by Righthaven. The Media Bloggers Association has filed an amicus curiae brief support the rights of the bloggers and raising First Amendment issues. Other attorneys have accused Righthaven of fraud, according to a report from the Las Vegas Sun.

Practice Tip: Although Righthaven has not filed any copyright infringement lawsuits in Indiana district courts to date, this story illustrates the importance of ensuring that a web blogger has rights to use all materials that are posted on the blog. This story brings forth yet again the continuing controversies surrounding copyrights and the Internet.

April 20, 2011

Simon Property Group and NorthMobileTech Embroiled in Patent Controversy Over Mobile Application For Mall Marketing

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, IN – Patent lawyers for Simon Property Group of Indianapolis, Indiana filed a patent lawsuit against NorthMobileTech of Middleton, Wisconsin. In its complaint, Simon states that NorthMobileTech has accused Simon of infringing NorthMobileTech’s patent, and Simon believes a patent infringement lawsuit against it is imminent. On April 20, 2011, the same day as Simon’s patent attorneys filed its suit, patent attorneys for NorthMobileTech filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Simon in the Western District of Wisconsin.
Continue reading