Indiana Intellectual Property Law News

January 15, 2024

Tap Wars: Delta Faucet Company’s Patent Dispute with Sanitary Ware

In the modern era of technological advancements and the burgeoning landscape of online commerce, the interconnection of patent law with the dynamics of e-commerce platforms presents intricate challenges. A recent legal dispute between Wenzhou Xin Xin Sanitary Ware Co., Ltd. (“Sanitary Ware” or “Plaintiff”) and Delta Faucet Company (“DFC”) illuminates the complexities faced by international entities selling products on major online platforms like Amazon, particularly concerning allegations of patent infringement.

According to the complaint, Sanitary Ware, a Chinese-based company operating as “HGN Sanitary Ware,” sells kitchen appliances and accessories, including glass rinsers, primarily through the Amazon Marketplace. Court documents also describe DFC, as an American plumbing fixture manufacturer under Masco Corporation, who is alleging patent infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 11,473,277 (“the ‘277 Patent”) against specific Xin Glass Rinsers listed by Sanitary Ware on Amazon.

DFC claims ‘277 Patent details a rinsing apparatus comprising components like a mounting base, fluid discharge member, valve member, and escutcheon. DFC says they initiated an Amazon Patent Evaluation Express (“APEX”) proceeding against Sanitary Ware’s Xin Glass Rinser based on claim 1 of the ‘277 Patent, and Sanitary Ware chose not to participate in the APEX, leading Amazon to remove the listing of the disputed Xin Glass Rinser.

January 12, 2024

Charting New Waters: Steamboat Willie’s Mickey Mouse Sets Sail into the Public Domain

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

On January 1, 2024, a significant shift in intellectual property rights occurred with the iconic American pop culture figure, Mickey Mouse, entering the public domain. The copyright for Mickey’s debut appearance in the 1928 short film, “Steamboat Willie,” finally expired, allowing a specific portrayal of the beloved character to become available for public use.

This momentous occasion follows a prolonged journey shaped by numerous extensions and revisions of copyright laws. Under U.S. copyright law, which typically spans 95 years, the extension became colloquially known as the “Mickey Mouse Protection Act.” This extension, sought not only by Disney but also by a coalition of copyright holders, aimed to safeguard their works for an extended period.

Jennifer Jenkins, a law professor and director of Duke’s Center for the Study of Public Domain, compared this milestone to the puff of smoke from a steamboat, expressing her enthusiasm at the symbolic moment.

January 8, 2024

Trademark Infringement Suit Over “Buttermilk”

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

In a recent legal case involving Illinois Plaintiff, SAK Group, Inc. and Indiana Defendant, Blue Hill Hospitality, Inc., the complexities of trademark infringement and its legal implications came to the forefront.

According to the complaint, SAK Group, Inc., is a renowned restaurant group operating under the trademark “Buttermilk Café.” They initiated legal action against Blue Hill Hospitality, Inc., alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. The Plaintiff asserted that Blue Hill Hospitality’s use of the name “Buttermilk Pancake House” and its similar mark posed a threat to SAK’s established trademark rights, leading to confusion among consumers.

The complaint filed by SAK Group, Inc. encompassed various legal claims, including federal trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, false designation of origin, passing off, unfair competition, and violation of state laws related to deceptive trade practices. Each claim was supported by specific allegations regarding the similarities in marks, potential confusion among consumers, and the alleged willful nature of Blue Hill Hospitality’s actions.

January 5, 2024

Perma-Green Supreme, Inc. v. Dr. Permagreen, LLC

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

In a recent lawsuit filed by Perma-Green Supreme, Inc. against Dr. Permagreen, LLC, Michael Edward Klott, and FTW Investments LLC, Perma-Green, an Indiana entity in the commercial lawn-care equipment industry, alleges that the defendants engaged in the deliberate and unauthorized use of Perma-Green’s trademark, PERMAGREEN. The complaint asserts that the defendants sold products under the name ‘Dr. Permagreen,’ which, according to the Plaintiff, bears a confusing similarity to Perma-Green’s mark, misleading consumers into falsely believing that the products were affiliated with Perma-Green. These allegations suggest that the defendants’ actions caused consumer confusion, negatively impacting Perma-Green’s reputation and raising concerns about product safety.

If the Plaintiff’s allegations are proven true, this infringement not only violates federal laws, particularly the Lanham Act but also raises ethical questions surrounding fair competition and consumer protection. Regarding potential consequences, the relief sought by Perma-Green includes injunctions, damages, and legal fees, indicating the potential ramifications faced by the defendants for trademark infringement and deceptive practices.

The case has been assigned to Judge Philip P. Simon and Magistrate Judge John E. Martin, in the U.S. District Court of Northern Indiana, and assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-00341-PPS-JEM.

January 1, 2024

Copyright Infringement in the Digital Age: Watson Music Group v. Borshoff, Inc.

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

In the contemporary digital landscape, the protection of intellectual property, especially in the realm of creative works, has become a paramount concern. Copyright infringement, the unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted material, continues to pose significant challenges for creators and rights holders. A recent case involving Plaintiff Watson Music Group, LLC. d/b/a Quadrasound Music and Defendant Borshoff, Inc. sheds light on the complexities and legalities surrounding copyright infringement in the digital sphere.

Plaintiff Watson Music Group, a Florida-based limited liability company, alleges that Defendant Borshoff, Inc., an Indiana corporation, infringed upon its copyrighted musical work titled “Space Jam.” The alleged infringement occurred on Defendant’s social media account ‘@borshofftalks’ hosted on Facebook.

The complaint describes an unauthorized posting of a discernable excerpt of the Plaintiff’s copyrighted musical work on the Defendant’s Facebook account. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant, without obtaining proper permission or authorization, reproduced, stored, and made available the copyrighted material for public performance via a digital audio transmission, thereby violating the Plaintiff’s exclusive rights as a copyright holder.

December 29, 2023

Chef’s Legal Battle: Matsumoto Sues Pho Real LLC for Unauthorized Image Use

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Plaintiff Shoichi Matsumoto has sued Defendant Pho Real LLC, alleging copyright infringement of Matsumoto’s original work, a photograph titled “Yakisoba-4”. Matsumoto, a private chef, TV host, and photographer, claims that Pho Real used his copyrighted work without permission on their website and on a food ordering platform, Grubhub Inc., to promote its restaurant business. Matsumoto asserts that he owns the copyright to the image and had not licensed or authorized Pho Real to use it.

The complaint specifies that Matsumoto registered the work with the Copyright Office and that Pho Real’s actions of copying, displaying, and distributing the photograph were unauthorized and willful. Matsumoto alleges that he suffered irreparable harm due to Pho Real’s actions and seeks damages, including Pho Real’s profits from the infringement or statutory damages, along with legal fees and costs. Additionally, Matsumoto requests a preliminary and permanent injunction to prevent Pho Real from further infringing on his copyright.

The case has been assigned to Judge Sarah Evans Barker and Magistrate Judge Kellie M. Barr, in the U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana, and assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-02059-SEB-KMB.

December 25, 2023

Protecting Creative Rights: Alexander Bayonne Stross v. Homestead Properties, Inc.

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

A recent lawsuit, Stross v. Tiny Timbers, involves a copyright infringement dispute between Alexander Bayonne Stross, a photographer and owner of copyrighted works, and Homestead Properties, Inc. dba Tiny Timbers, a hardwood products manufacturer. Stross alleges that Tiny Timbers unlawfully used his copyrighted photograph for advertising and promotional purposes on Homestead Properties’ website without his authorization.

Stross has filed a complaint against Tiny Timbers citing violations of the Copyright Act, specifically alleging unauthorized copying, distribution, and removal of copyright identification. He asserts that his work was registered with the Copyright Office and contains identifiable copyright management information, which was removed by Tiny Timbers when they allegedly used the image without permission.

Seeking recourse, Stross pursues both injunctive relief to prevent further infringement claims and monetary damages or profits resulting from the alleged unauthorized use of his copyrighted work. Additionally, he requests attorney’s fees and other remedies provided for under the Copyright Act.

December 22, 2023

Upholding Quality and Protecting Brands: Tempur Sealy v. Luxury Mattress & Furniture

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

In the competitive world of mattresses and bedding, brand recognition and trust are paramount. Companies invest years in building their reputation, and protecting their intellectual property is crucial. Plaintiff Tempur Sealy International Inc. recently filed a lawsuit against Defendant Luxury Mattress & Furniture LLC, a suit highlighting the significance of safeguarding trademarks and brand integrity.

According to the complaint, Tempur Sealy is a renowned name in the realm of premium mattresses. Known for its TEMPUR-PEDIC products, Tempur Sealy claims distinctiveness based on their high-quality materials and unparalleled comfort. The company states that they meticulously develop, manufacture, and market products under various trademarks such as TEMPUR, TEMPUR-PEDIC, and TEMPUR SEALY. In addition, they describe exhaustive efforts to maintain their brand’s integrity, from stringent quality control measures to an authorized network of retailers, attempting to ensure that customers receive authentic products and services.

The Plaintiff claims that on February 2, 2023, it notified the Defendant that it was terminating Luxury Mattress’s authorization to sell Tempur Sealy products. The Plaintiff then alleges that Luxury Mattress continued to use the TEMPUR-PEDIC Marks in its Valparaiso, Indiana, retail location and on its website. Furthermore, Tempur Sealy asserts that the Defendant was using the TEMPUR-PEDIC Marks to advertise different products that were not associated with the Plaintiff’s product.

December 18, 2023

Honoring a Legacy of Service: U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael G. Gotsch, Sr., Announces Retirement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

After an illustrious four-decade career dedicated to public service, U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael G. Gotsch, Sr., has declared his intent to retire in August 2024. His impending retirement from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana marks the culmination of a remarkable journey.

Judge Gotsch, with nearly twenty years as a judge and seven years in the federal judiciary, has left an enduring legacy. His tenure as St. Joseph Circuit Court Judge saw transformative initiatives, including repurposing an old jail into spaces for courts and community programs.

A trailblazer in advocating for domestic violence victims, Judge Gotsch pioneered the Civil Protective Order (CPO) Court, prioritizing their protection. His pivotal role in implementing the Odyssey Case Management System across Indiana courts underscores his commitment to efficient judicial processes.

December 15, 2023

Legal Verdict: STMicroelectronics Liable for $32.5M Damages to Purdue University in Transistor Technology Patent Case

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

STMicroelectronics, a leading European chipmaker, has been held accountable for violating Purdue University’s patent related to transistor technology. This ruling, delivered by a jury in a West Texas court, resulted in a $32.5 million damages verdict. The jury supported Purdue’s argument that ST’s use of silicon carbide metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFETs) in electric-vehicle chargers and other devices breached the university’s patent rights specifically pertaining to transistors designed for “high-voltage power applications.” In response, an ST spokesperson announced the company’s plan to challenge the verdict by filing an appeal.

Michael Shore, an attorney representing Purdue, highlighted compelling evidence against ST, suggesting potential additional royalties exceeding $100 million before the patent’s expiration in 2026.

MOSFETs play a critical role in electronic devices by controlling and amplifying electricity flow. Purdue initiated the lawsuit against ST in 2021, alleging that the company’s MOSFETs infringed upon two of its transistor technology patents. However, one of Purdue’s patents was removed from the case by the university in West Lafayette, Indiana last year. ST contested the accusations, arguing that the remaining Purdue patent was invalid.