Trademark Infringement

September 8, 2025

Supplement Maker Prescribes Lawsuit in Label Dispute

Allseason IpCo, LLC has filed a lawsuit against two Chinese defendants, Jiabao Wang and a company nicknamed Guangzhou. The case centers on allegations of willful copyright infringement and misrepresentation under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

Allseason IpCo, which sells health supplements under the brand name CLEAN NUTRA or CLEAN NUTRACEUTICALS, claims that it owns the rights to several trademarks and copyrights, including the label for its product “VASCU GLOW” (Registration Number VA 2-454-182) The company says it discovered that the defendants were selling a nearly identical product on Amazon through the seller name VIFSSG, using what Allseason describes as a copied version of its copyrighted product label.

According to the complaint, Allseason filed a takedown notice with Amazon in July 2025, which resulted in the removal of the disputed product. Shortly afterward, the defendants submitted a counter-notice to Amazon stating that the removal was based on a mistake or misidentification. Allseason argues that this counter-notice was a false statement because the defendants were not authorized to use its copyrighted work. Under the DMCA, such a counter-notice caused Amazon to reinstate the listing unless Allseason filed a lawsuit within ten business days, which led to this legal action.

September 5, 2025

Pump the Brakes: RV Parts Makers Clash Over Designs

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Camco Manufacturing, LLC has filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana against Seaflo Marine & RV North America, LLC. The case centers on allegations of trademark, trade dress, and patent infringement, as well as unfair competition.

Camco, a company based in North Carolina with more than five decades in the recreational vehicle, boating, and camping accessories market, claims that Seaflo has copied its distinctive orange trade dress used on sewer hoses and fittings for RVs. According to the complaint, Camco has sold products with this design since 2006 and holds a federal trademark registration (U.S. Reg. No. 5,864,456) for the use of the color orange on those products. Camco argues that Seaflo’s products are so similar in appearance that consumers could be misled into believing they originate from or are associated with Camco.

In addition to the trade dress allegations, Camco asserts that Seaflo has infringed several of its patents, including one covering a corrugated hose with a bayonet connector (US Patent 11/732,829 B1) and another covering the ornamental design of a tongue jack pad (US Patent D893,120 S1). Camco claims that Seaflo’s competing sewer hose kits and jack stands are identical or nearly identical to its patented designs and therefore violate U.S. patent law.

August 29, 2025

Name of the Game: JD Sports vs. J.D. Sport

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

A trademark dispute over the name “JD Sports” has reached federal court in Indiana. The Finish Line, Inc., which does business as JD Sports, along with its parent company JD Sports Fashion Plc, is asking the court to declare that its use of the JD Sports name does not infringe on the rights of J.D. Sport LLC, a Pennsylvania company.

JD Sports Fashion Plc, based in the United Kingdom, operates thousands of stores worldwide and more than 300 in the United States. It holds several federal trademark registrations for “JD” and “JD Sports,” some classified as incontestable under U.S. law. The company states it has used these marks in the U.S. for years, first through online sales and later through physical stores, including several in Pennsylvania.

J.D. Sport LLC, founded in 1989 in Pennsylvania, operates a single store that provides custom embroidery, screen printing, and team apparel for local schools and organizations. The business does not have federal trademark registrations and instead relies on common law rights tied to its local use of the “J.D. Sport” name.

July 14, 2025

Rock and Troll: Led Zeppelin Takes on Online Sellers in Trademark Infringement Suit

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

A British company owned by the members of Led Zeppelin has filed a lawsuit in federal court in Indiana, accusing a group of unidentified online sellers—referred to in the complaint as “The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A”—of selling counterfeit merchandise that uses the band’s trademarks without authorization. The company, Superhype Tapes Limited, is based in London and owns the rights to several trademarks associated with Led Zeppelin, one of the most influential rock bands in history. The trademarks at issue in the case are LED ZEPPELIN (U.S. Reg. No. 4,340,692) and THE LED ZEPPELIN EXPERIENCE (U.S. Reg. No. 5,663,514).

According to the complaint, the online sellers have created e-commerce stores designed to trick consumers into thinking they’re buying legitimate Led Zeppelin merchandise. These stores, operating under multiple aliases, allegedly use similar design elements and even search keywords tied to the band’s name to attract buyers looking for official products.

The lawsuit says that the sellers are offering unauthorized goods such as clothing, posters, and other items that imitate the real products made and sold under Led Zeppelin’s brand. Superhype Tapes claims the merchandise not only infringes on their trademarks but also harms their reputation by confusing customers and diluting the value of the brand.

June 16, 2025

Brew-Haha Over Branding: Dog ‘N Suds Pours On the Pressure in Trademark Dispute

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

An Indiana-based company, TK&C’S, LLC, which operates under the name Dog ‘N Suds, has filed a lawsuit in federal court against a Michigan business, Airline Dog ‘N Suds, Inc., and its president, David J. Hosticka. The complaint centers around trademark infringement, unfair competition, and breach of contract.

Dog ‘N Suds alleges that it owns the exclusive rights to several trademarks associated with its brand, including names, logos, and recipes that date back to the 1950s and have been formally registered for decades. According to the lawsuit, Dog ‘N Suds entered into a licensing agreement with Airline Dog ‘N Suds in 2007, giving them permission to use these trademarks and recipes in a defined region of Michigan. That agreement expired in 2017 and was not renewed.

Despite the expiration of the license, Dog ‘N Suds claims that the Michigan business continued to use its name, branding, and products without authorization. The lawsuit includes allegations that Airline Dog ‘N Suds has continued selling food and root beer under the Dog ‘N Suds branding, which the Indiana company views as a violation of trademark law and a breach of the original licensing agreement. Dog ‘N Suds further claims that attempts to stop the use—including cease-and-desist letters sent in April 2025—were ignored or refused.

May 16, 2025

Glitch in the Merch: Australian Animation Studio Sues Over Alleged Counterfeit Circus

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Glitch Productions Pty Ltd, an Australian animation studio behind hit web series like The Amazing Digital Circus, has filed a lawsuit against various individuals and businesses operating e-commerce stores under various aliases. These stores are accused of selling counterfeit merchandise featuring Glitch’s registered trademarks without permission.

Founded in 2017, Glitch is known for its distinctive 3D animation style and has built a global fanbase with over 8.5 million YouTube subscribers. Its show The Amazing Digital Circus, created by Gooseworx, became a viral success after its October 2023 debut, amassing hundreds of millions of views and expanding to Netflix in 2024. Glitch sells official merchandise—such as clothing, figures, and posters—through its online store, with trademarks recognized in the U.S. and internationally.

The complaint alleges that the defendants target U.S. consumers, including in Indiana, by running interactive storefronts that accept U.S. dollars, ship domestically, and present counterfeit items as official products. Glitch claims the defendants intentionally copy its branding to mislead buyers and weaken its trademark value. The company states it has not authorized these sellers and that their actions violate its intellectual property rights.

April 28, 2025

Weight Loss, Heavy Lawsuit: Lilly says Premier’s Shots Miss the Mark

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Premier Weight Loss, also known as Premier Weight Loss of Indiana, is facing a lawsuit from Eli Lilly and Company. The lawsuit claims Premier has been selling altered versions of Lilly’s FDA-approved drugs, MOUNJARO® and ZEPBOUND®. Lilly accuses Premier of repackaging these medications, removing them from their original packaging, and distributing them in third-party insulin syringes without proper labeling, patient instructions, or safety information. Lilly argues that these altered drugs are unsafe, as they lack essential information like batch numbers and expiration dates, and may not meet FDA-approved dosages or sterility standards.

Lilly points out that Premier’s practices, including splitting auto-injector pens into multiple doses, can result in inconsistent and potentially harmful concentrations. The company also says Premier’s marketing misleads consumers and healthcare providers into believing these altered products are authentic, when they are not. Premier’s use of Lilly’s trademarks in advertisements is also a violation of intellectual property laws, according to the lawsuit.

Lilly argues that these practices pose serious risks to patients, particularly those using the drugs to manage conditions like type 2 diabetes. They believe the unapproved alterations could lead to ineffective treatments or dangerous side effects. The lawsuit aims to stop the sale of these allegedly altered drugs and correct Premier’s supposed false advertising. Lilly is also seeking damages for the purported harm caused by Premier’s actions.

April 16, 2025

Bone of Contention: WOOF FEST Fight Lands in Court

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Evansville, Indiana – A legal dispute has emerged over a local fundraising event called “Woof Fest.” Allison Bush, an event organizer who has been planning and promoting fundraising events since 2019, claims her intellectual property has been used without permission by P.A.A.W.S., Inc.—a local animal rescue group—and its treasurer, Julie Frazier.

According to the complaint, in July 2024, Bush and Frazier began discussing a joint fundraising event to benefit local foster-based animal rescues. During those discussions, Frazier suggested the name ‘Woofstock,’ despite allegedly knowing it was already used by another organization. In response, Bush says she proposed the alternative name ‘Woof Fest.’

Court Documents state that Bush then moved forward with the idea, hiring an artist to create a logo using images of her own dogs. The case filings further report that Bush paid for the design, received full rights to it, and began promoting “Woof Fest” on social media and other platforms. Records note that she later registered the name, WOOF FEST, and logo with the U.S. Copyright Office and applied for federal trademark protection.

March 24, 2025

Trademark Tug-of-War: Shezan Brands Battle Over Trademark Registrations

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Shezan Services (Private) Limited and Shezan International Limited have filed a legal complaint seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against Indiana companies, Intershez Corporation and Shezan, LLC. The plaintiffs claim that Intershez and Shezan, LLC fraudulently registered Shezan Services’ trademarks in the United States and used these registrations to have U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) detain shipments of genuine Shezan products.

According to court documents, Shezan International, established in 1964, is known for high-quality food and beverage products, including juices, jams, sauces, and canned goods. These products are sold in over 25 countries, including the United States. Shezan Services claims to own the SHEZAN trademark and logo for these products.

Plaintiffs allege that Intershez, formed in 1996 and with a distribution agreement with Shezan International, registered Shezan Services’ trademarks without permission in 2004. They further claim that in 2020, these trademarks were transferred to Shezan, LLC, a company established by the same individuals who previously managed Intershez. The plaintiffs argue that after Intershez was dissolved in 2008, it falsely claimed ownership of the trademarks and used them to record with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), resulting in the detention of genuine Shezan products.

March 21, 2025

Trouble at Home: My Healthy Home, LLC Takes Legal Action Over Trademark Dispute Against Healthy Home Experts, LLC

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

My Healthy Home LLC, a New Jersey-based company focused on promoting healthier living environments, has filed a complaint against the Indiana-based company Healthy Home Experts, LLC, and Joshua Harper for trademark infringement. According to court documents, My Healthy Home has been recognized since 2002 for its environmentally friendly services, including air quality testing and mold remediation, and holds several federally registered trademarks, including HEALTHY HOME EXPERT.

The dispute centers around the defendants registering the domain name https://www.healthyhomeexperts.net/ and forming a business under the name Healthy Home Experts, LLC, which reportedly creates confusion due to its similarity to My Healthy Home’s trademark. The defendants reportedly offer overlapping services, such as air quality testing and mold remediation, using the allegedly infringing name.

My Healthy Home is seeking legal relief for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, cybersquatting, and unfair competition. The company is requesting an injunction to stop the defendants from using the infringing name and domain, as well as damages, including the transfer of the domain to My Healthy Home. They also seek reimbursement for attorney’s fees and compensation for any harm caused to their brand.