ORDER

ROY B. DALTON, Jr., District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on the parties' cross motions for summary judgment. (Docs. 276, 277.)

On August 19, 2014, Plaintiff Commodores Entertainment Corporation initiated this trademark infringement action seeking damages and injunctive relief against Defendants Thomas McClary ("McClary") and Fifth Avenue Entertainment, LLC. (Doc. 1.) Generally, Plaintiffs allege that they have rights to the "Commodores" trademarks ("Trademarks"), and that McClary has infringed on those rights. (See id.) Defendants raise numerous defenses, including that: (1) McClary has common law ownership of the Trademarks; and (2) Plaintiff does not own or have enforceable rights to the Trademarks. (Doc. 40, pp. 13-14; Doc. 59, p. 13.)

Since the outset, this litigation has been contentious and the issues have become increasingly convoluted. Consequently, in effort to effectively and efficiently manage the case, the Court bifurcated the action into two phases. (See Doc. 311.) The first phase will concern ownership of the Trademarks ("Phase One"), and depending on the outcome of Phase One, the second phase will concern the alleged infringement and damages. (See id.; see also Doc. 321.)

A jury trial for Phase One ("Trial") is scheduled to commence on July 25, 2016. (See Doc. 332.) Pending for resolution before Trial are the parties cross motions for summary judgment (collectively, the "Motions"). (Docs. 276, 277.) The Motions are fully briefed (see Docs. 276, 277, 281, 282, 285)1 and ripe for the Court's consideration.2

Defendants move for summary judgment on the ground that Plaintiff does not own or have rights to the Trademarks. (See Doc. 276, pp. 6-7, 10-25.) In its respective Motion, Plaintiff takes the opposite position, arguing that it owns and has enforceable rights to the Trademarks as a matter of law. (Doc. 277, pp. 6-10.) In light of the conflicting evidence in support of the parties' Motions, the Court finds that it is unable to determine ownership of the Trademarks as a matter of law. Indeed, questions of fact remain regarding, inter alia, the historical use and federal registrations of the Trademarks.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 276) and Plaintiff and Third Party Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 277) are DENIED. This action will proceed to trial as scheduled on July 25, 2016.