Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Tapatio Foods, LLC v. Rodriguez, 1:19-cv-00335-DAD-SKO. (2020)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20200218a12 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 13, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 13, 2020
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION (Doc. Nos. 16, 24) DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . On April 3, 2019, plaintiff Tapatio Foods LLC ("plaintiff") filed a first amended complaint ("FAC"), alleging claims for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1114, 1125, as well as a claim for unfair competition under California law against defendant Sulaiman Waleed
More

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

(Doc. Nos. 16, 24)

On April 3, 2019, plaintiff Tapatio Foods LLC ("plaintiff") filed a first amended complaint ("FAC"), alleging claims for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125, as well as a claim for unfair competition under California law against defendant Sulaiman Waleed Rodriguez ("defendant").1 (Doc. No. 5.) The FAC seeks a permanent injunction, restraining defendant from engaging in any further trademark infringement, unfair competition, or dilution. (Id. at 11.)

On April 15, 2019, defendant was served with the FAC. (Doc. No. 10.) On June 21, 2019, after defendant failed to respond to the FAC, plaintiff requested entry of default against defendant, and on June 24, 2019, the Clerk of the Court entered default. (Doc. Nos. 11, 12.) On August 6, 2019, plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment and a permanent injunction against defendant. (Doc. No. 16.) This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 302.

On November 20, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that plaintiff's motion for default judgment and a permanent injunction be granted. (Doc. No. 24.) Plaintiff served a copy of the findings and recommendations on defendant on November 20, 2019. (See Doc. No. 25.) The findings and recommendations provided that any party could file objections thereto within twenty-one (21) days. To date, no objections have been filed and the time for doing so has since expired.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that that:

1. The November 20, 2019 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 24) are adopted in full; 2. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment and a permanent injunction (Doc. No. 16) is granted; 3. Defendant is permanently enjoined as follows. Defendant and all those acting in concert or privity with defendant who receive actual notice of this order by personal service or otherwise shall: a. Permanently cease using and refrain from adopting for any product or service, or in any marketing material: i. any trademarks containing the words TAPATIO; ii. any marks confusingly similar to the TAPATIO MARKS;2 iii. the TIOWAXY Mark; iv. the TIOWAXY and Design Mark; v. any trademarks that bear an image of a Charro (meaning a traditional horseman from Mexico); and vi. any marks featuring text in an arching red font; b. Recall and destroy any of its marketing material, letterhead, business cards, signs, banners, clothing, or other media whether physical or digital, bearing the trademarks identified in ¶ 3a above; c. Change any username, under its control, for all social media and email accounts to one that does not contain the phrase "TAPATIO" or any marks confusingly similar to TAPATIO; d. Be restrained and enjoined from telling any customer, vendor, distributor or other person or business that they are in any way related to or affiliated with plaintiff; e. The court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this permanent injunction; 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in plaintiff's favor and close this case; and 5. Plaintiff is directed to mail a copy of this order to defendant at his last known address.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The FAC initially named other defendants as well, but those defendants were voluntarily dismissed by plaintiff. (See Doc. Nos. 13, 14, 15, 17.)
2. United States Trademark Registration Nos. 1,228,964; 4,997,043; 3,837,981; and 4,545,088.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer