Indiana Intellectual Property Law News

May 15, 2019

Jury Awards Herff Jones Multi-Million Dollar Verdict Against Jostens for Interfering with Employment Contracts

Indianapolis, Indiana – Herff Jones, based in Indianapolis, Indiana won a multimillion-dollar case against its largest competitor, Jostens Inc., headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Herff Jones also won significant judgments against John Wiggins and Chris Urnis, former employees of Herff Jones distributor, Brent Gilbert of GradPro Recognition Products in the same case.

Jostens began negotiating employment agreements with Wiggins and Urnis prior to their leaving GradPro, despite their having strict noncompete agreements with GradPro, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit further claimed one of Jostens authorized representatives took at least five employees from GradPro in an effort to take away business from Herff Jones.

Jostens lost the suit as the jury found it conspired and stole confidential and trade secret information and interfered with Herff Jones’ employment contracts. The jury awarded nearly $1.9 million in compensatory damages against Jostens, Wiggins, and Urnis to Herff Jones, and another $580,000 to Brent Gilbert of GradPro. Punitive damages in the amounts of $650,000, $25,000, and $10,000 were also assessed against Jostens, Wiggins, and Urnis, respectively.

May 8, 2019

Indiana Copyright Litigation: Cision US, Inc. Sued for Copyright Infringement by Attorney Richard Bell

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Attorney Richard Bell of McCordsville, Indiana filed suit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging that Cision US, Inc. (“Cision”), conducts business in the district, and infringed his rights in United States Copyright No. VA0001785115, the “Indianapolis Photo”. Bell is seeking actual and statutory damages, costs, attorneys’ fees, and any other relief as is just and proper.

Bell, who has filed numerous copyright infringement lawsuits over the Indianapolis Photo, claims Cision published the Indianapolis Photo on its website without his permission beginning in or around 2018. The Complaint asserts Plaintiff’s claim that Cision took or downloaded the Indianapolis Photo without his permission prior to publishing the photo on its website. The Complaint further alleges Cision falsely represented that it owned the rights to publish the Indianapolis Photo by adding a copyright notice to the bottom of each page of its website.

Per the Complaint, Cision has not agreed to be enjoined from using the Indianapolis Photo. Plaintiff states Cision refuses to pay for the unauthorized use of the Indianapolis Photo and that it has allowed third parties to access its website and the Indianapolis Photo. As such, Bell is seeking damages for copyright infringement and vicarious liability for each copy downloaded by a third-party user.

May 7, 2019

New Northern District of Indiana Judge to be Sworn In

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Fort Wayne, Indiana – Former Attorney Holly Brady has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate to serve as judge in the Northern District of Indiana. Brady is only the second woman to serve as judge in the Northern District and the first judge to join the court in nine years. Brady will take the seat vacated in September 2017 by Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen.

Brady, a native Hoosier, received her undergraduate degree from Indiana University and went on to attend Valparaiso University School of Law. After graduating, Brady has worked in multiple Fort Wayne law firms in the fields of labor and employment law. Brady’s history of a strong federal practice made her a good candidate for the vacancy and she is expected to have a formal swearing-in ceremony in August.

May 6, 2019

Indiana Patent Litigation: Dr. Rick C. Sasso Seeks Royalties from Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. and its Affiliates

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Kosciusko County, Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiff, Rick C. Sasso, M.D. (“Dr. Sasso”) of Carmel, Indiana, originally filed suit in the Kosciusko County Superior Court in Indiana alleging that Defendants, Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., Medtronic, PLC, and Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., have denied him and his accounting firm access to their sales ledger per two separate agreements. Dr. Sasso is seeking an injunction ordering Defendants to provide full access to its sales ledger to determine royalties owed to Dr. Sasso under two separate agreements. As of April 12, 2019, Defendants filed a Notice of Removal to remove the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana.

Per the complaint, Dr. Sasso is a board-certified orthopedic surgeon specializing in the treatment of the spine. Dr. Sasso claims the Defendants, together, are top manufacturers for spine implants. It is claimed Dr. Sasso entered into two separate agreements with Sofamor Danek Holding, Inc., which was later acquired by Warsaw Orthopedic through a merger. The first alleged agreement, is the 1999 Screw Delivery System Agreement on November 18, 1999 (the “1999 Agreement”). The second alleged agreement is the 2001 Vertex Agreement, entered into on July 26, 2001 (the “2001 Agreement”). Dr. Sasso claims that these agreements have clauses that enable him to “inspect, examine, audit, and copy [Defendants’] records” relating to the agreements once per calendar year.

In August 2013, Dr. Sasso filed a different suit against the Defendants for unpaid royalties under both the 1999 and 2001 Agreements. Dr. Sasso was granted royalties in the amount of $79,794,721.00 for the 1999 Agreement and $32,657,548.00 for the 2001 Agreement, which has been appealed by Defendants. According to the complaint, the 1999 Agreement requires the Defendants to continue paying royalties until the expiration of U.S. Patent No. 6,287,313 and U.S. Patent No. 6,562,046, on or about November 23, 2019. Dr. Sasso also claims the 2001 Agreement requires Defendants to pay royalties to him so long as “the Medical Device is covered by a valid claim of an issued patent arising out of the Intellectual Property Rights.”

May 3, 2019

Patent Office Issues 244 Patents To Indiana Citizens in April 2019

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Overhauser Law Offices, the publisher of this site, assists with US and foreign patent searches, patent applications and assists with enforcing patents via infringement litigation and licensing.

The U.S. Patent Office issued the following 244 patent registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in April 2019, based on applications filed by Indiana patent attorneys:

	Patent No.	Title
1	D0847440	Blocking member for a door assembly of an animal enclosure
2	D0847342	Spinal implant
3	D0847341	Spinal implant
4	D0847306	Faucet handle
5	10,277,344	System and method for facilitation of a geographically relevant radio station and transmission of related content

May 2, 2019

192 Trademark Registrations Issued to Indiana Companies in April 2019

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

The U.S. Trademark Office issued the following 192 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in April 2019 based on applications filed by Indiana trademark attorneys:

Registration No.	Word Mark
5734107	MOVE WITH ME
5735891	12 FLAVOR GUMMI BEARS
5734081	GUARDIAN
5735876	FLOOD INSURANCE SOLUTIONS
5733986	GEORGE REMUS
5733985	ROSSVILLE UNION

April 29, 2019

Indiana Copyright Litigation: Attorney Richard Bell Seeks Damages for Copyright Infringement From Marriott, LLC

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Attorney Richard Bell of McCordsville, Indiana filed suit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging that Marriott, LLC, who conducts business in the district, infringed his rights in United States Copyright No. VA0001785115, the “Indianapolis Photo”. Bell is seeking actual and statutory damages, costs, attorneys’ fees, and any other relief as is just and proper.

Bell claims the Indianapolis Photo is an original work that was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office on August 4, 2011. He further claims that because of his use of the Indianapolis Photo to advertise his photography business, it can be identified by the public as being created by Bell. Since the registration of the Indianapolis Photo, Bell has filed many lawsuits for copyright infringement.

According to the complaint, Marriott used the Indianapolis Photo on its website to draw or attract prospective customers. Bell claims he discovered Marriott’s use of the Indianapolis Photo in March 2018 and that the photo was visible on Marriott’s website on April 6, 2018. Bell is seeking damages for copyright infringement including vicarious liability damages for each downloaded copy of the Indianapolis Photo from Marriott’s website by third-party users.

April 26, 2019

Indiana Trademark Litigation: Super 8 Sues Auburn, Indiana Hotel for Alleged Trademark Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Fort Wayne, Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiff, Super 8 Worldwide, Inc. (“Super 8”) of Parsippany, New Jersey filed suit in the Northern District of Indiana alleging that Defendants, Harvee Properties, LLC (“Harvee”) and Paresh Patel (“Patel”), both of Auburn, Indiana, infringed its rights in United States Trademark Registration Numbers 1602723 for the mark SUPER 8, 3610108 for the mark SUPER 8 & Design (b/w), 3610109 for the mark SUPER 8 & Design (Color), 1951982 for the mark SUPER 8 HOTEL & Plaque Design, and 1128057 for the mark SUPER 8 MOTEL & Design. Super 8 is seeking preliminary and permanent injunction, direct damages, indirect damages, consequential damages, special damages, costs, actual damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest, actual costs, and attorney’s fees.

The Complaint asserts that Super 8 is a widely known provider for guest lodging services and that it first used the SUPER 8 MOTEL mark in 1973. Super 8 claims that pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1065, all of the marks at issue in this case (the “Super 8 Marks”) have achieved incontestable status. Per the complaint, Super 8 franchises its guest lodging services and allows its franchisees to utilize the Super 8 Marks to promote its brand and allow consumers to identify the origin of its services.

Super 8 claims it entered into a franchise agreement on March 31, 2017 with Amrex Receivers, LLC (“Amrex”) for Amrex to operate a Super 8 facility for twenty years in Auburn, Indiana. The Complaint alleges that Amrex terminated the franchise agreement on December 4, 2017. On or about December 29, 2017, Super 8 claims it sent a letter acknowledging the termination and informing Amrex that it must immediately discontinue use of the Super 8 Marks and remove any items from the premises bearing any Super 8 mark within ten days of receiving the letter.

April 25, 2019

Indiana Copyright Litigation: The Rainmaker Group Sued For Copyright Infringement By Attorney Richard Bell

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Attorney Richard Bell of McCordsville, Indiana filed suit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging The Rainmaker Group – Rent Jungle LLC (“Rainmaker”) who conducts business in the district infringed his rights in United States Copyright No. VA0001785115, the “Indianapolis Photo”. Bell is seeking actual and statutory damages, costs, attorneys’ fees, and any other relief the court may find just and proper.

Bell, an attorney and self-proclaimed professional photographer claims he took the Indianapolis Photo in March 2000. The Complaint alleges that since then, Bell has published or licensed the Indianapolis Photo in compliance with copyright laws. After registering his work with the U.S. Copyright Office, Bell has filed a substantial number of lawsuits concerning copyright infringement of the Indianapolis Photo.

The Complaint alleges Rainmaker published the Indianapolis Photo on its website to attract prospective customers. Bell claims he discovered Rainmaker’s use of the Indianapolis Photo on December 14, 2017 and that it was visible to viewers of its website on March 7, 2019. Bell is seeking a judgment for copyright infringement and vicarious liability for each and every copy of the Indianapolis Photo that was downloaded from Rainmaker’s website by each third-party Internet user, including damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 504 and 505, and 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

April 24, 2019

Stronghold Games Sues for Trademark Infringement of Popular Board Game

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiff, Indie Game Studios, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, d/b/a Stronghold Games LLC of Florida (“Stronghold”), filed suit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging that Defendants, Plan B Games, Inc., a Canadian corporation, and Plan B Games Europe GMBH, a German Company of Hamburg Germany, (collectively “Plan B”) infringed its rights to the Great Western Trail Board Game. The complaint alleges jurisdiction is proper due to Plan B’s presence and activities at the 2018 GenCon convention in Indianapolis, Indiana along with other sales within the District. Stronghold is seeking damages, cost of the action, attorneys’ fees, and all other relief the court may find just and proper.

Stronghold claims it contracted with a German company, eggertspiele GmbH & Co. KG (“eggertspiele”), in 2016 regarding a soon-to be released game to be marketed under the trademark “Great Western Trail.” The complaint alleges Stronghold provided feedback to eggertspiele regarding the English version of the game prior to its finalization and that Stronghold obtained exclusive rights to sell the board game in the English language throughout Canada and the United States. Stronghold claims the term of the agreement was from August 3, 2016 through December 31, 2018, with future successive one-year extensions, which could be cancelled by 3-month written notice.

The complaint alleges that the Great Western Trail name and its distinctive lettering was inherently distinctive as a board game trademark. Stronghold claims because it promoted and sold the Stronghold version of the game throughout the United States, Stronghold became the common law owner of the Great Western Trail Marks (“GWT Marks”) for board games in the United States. Stronghold further claims that because its “Stronghold Games ‘Castle’ logo” was also placed on the game box, the game was associated with Stronghold. According to the complaint, Stronghold expended a significant amount of time, money, and effort to promote and market its Great Western Trail game throughout the United States and Canada.