Filed: Aug. 25, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 25, 2016
Summary: [PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT R. GARY KLAUSNER , District Judge . 1. This action came on for jury trial, Honorable Judge R. Gary Klausner, District Court Judge, presiding, and the issues having been duly tried and the jury having rendered its verdict on June 8, 2016 awarding Plaintiff $2,000,000 in total damages. (ECF No. 109). 2. On July 11, 2016, this Court entered an order on Defendant's Motion for Directed Verdict reducing the jury award by $800,000. (ECF No. 121). 3. On July 11, 201
Summary: [PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT R. GARY KLAUSNER , District Judge . 1. This action came on for jury trial, Honorable Judge R. Gary Klausner, District Court Judge, presiding, and the issues having been duly tried and the jury having rendered its verdict on June 8, 2016 awarding Plaintiff $2,000,000 in total damages. (ECF No. 109). 2. On July 11, 2016, this Court entered an order on Defendant's Motion for Directed Verdict reducing the jury award by $800,000. (ECF No. 121). 3. On July 11, 2016..
More
[PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT
R. GARY KLAUSNER, District Judge.
1. This action came on for jury trial, Honorable Judge R. Gary Klausner, District Court Judge, presiding, and the issues having been duly tried and the jury having rendered its verdict on June 8, 2016 awarding Plaintiff $2,000,000 in total damages. (ECF No. 109).
2. On July 11, 2016, this Court entered an order on Defendant's Motion for Directed Verdict reducing the jury award by $800,000. (ECF No. 121).
3. On July 11, 2016, this Court entered Judgment on the Verdict for the Plaintiff for the sum of $1,200,000. (ECF No. 122).
4. On August 16, 2016, this Court entered an order on Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration vacating the remaining jury award of $1,200,000. (ECF No. 139).
5. On August 22, 2016, this Court denied Plaintiff's request for Attorney Fees. (ECF No. 141).
6. On August 22, 2016, this Court entered a Permanent Injunction Order against Defendant. (ECF No. 142).
Now therefore, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
The Judgment on the Verdict for the Plaintiff awarding Plaintiff $1,200,000 with interest (ECF No. 122) is hereby vacated;
Defendant and its employees, directors, owners, officers, managers, and agents are prohibited from offering for sale, selling, importing or distributing any product that bears the "Kaloud" or Kaloud "Lotus" name and/or trademark, including the stylized logo of Reg. No. 4762725 and Kaloud Lotus trade dress, or from stating expressly or impliedly in any communication or advertisement that any product is sponsored with, affiliated by or sourced from Kaloud, or from using or facilitating the use of, in any manner "Kaloud" or "Kaloud Lotus" name and/or trademark, including the stylized logo of Reg. No. 4762725 or the Kaloud Lotus trade dress, unless that product is an authorized Kaloud product;
Defendant shall recover the costs it incurred in defending against Plaintiff's claims; and
This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for purposes of enforcing this judgment, by way of contempt or otherwise.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
