Arcona, Inc. v. Farmacy Beauty, LLC, et al

Filing 138

JUDGMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, ANDDECREED that: 1. Pursuant to the Courts Order Granting Defendants Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 129), and Order on Plaintiffs Request(ECF No. 136), judgment is e ntered in favor of Defendants and againstPlaintiff on Plaintiffs First Cause of Action for Trademark Counterfeiting of Arconas 079 Trademark Registration pursuant to the Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984. 2. Plaintiffs Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth causes of action for trademark infringement of Arconas 079 Trademark Registration and unfair competition (Federal and State Law), respectively, all of which are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 3. Pursuant to the Courts Order on Plaintiffs Req uest (ECF No. 136), Defendants counterclaims for non-infringement and cancellation of Arconas 079 Trademark Registration are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; 4. All other dates and deadlines in this case are hereby VACATED; and 5. The Clerk of the Court shall close the case. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (vv)

Download PDF
1 JS-6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION 9 10 11 ARCONA, INC., a California corporation, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CASE NO. 2:17-cv-07058 ODW (JPRx) JUDGMENT Plaintiff, v. The Hon. Otis D. Wright II FARMACY BEAUTY, LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company, DAVID C. CHUNG, an individual, and MARK VEEDER, an individual, Defendants. AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS 1 This Action arises from Plaintiff Arcona, Inc.’s First Amended Complaint 2 (ECF No. 34) against Defendants Farmacy Beauty, LLC, David C. Chung, and 3 Mark Veeder (collectively, “Defendants”) for: 1) Trademark Counterfeiting of 4 Arcona’s U.S. Trademark Registration No. 4,706,079 (“Arcona’s ‘079 Trademark 5 Registration”); 2) Infringement of Arcona’s ‘079 Trademark Registration; 3) 6 Violation of Federal Unfair Competition; 4) Unfair Competition under California 7 Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq.; and 5) California Common 8 Law Unfair Competition. Defendants have asserted counterclaims seeking a 9 declaration of non-infringement and cancellation of Arcona’s ‘079 Trademark 10 Registration. 11 On March 19, 2019, the Court granted summary judgment for Defendants on 12 Plaintiff’s claim for counterfeiting having found, inter alia, that “no reasonable jury 13 could find that Defendants’ EYE DEW product is a counterfeit of Plaintiff’s EYE 14 DEW products.” (ECF No. 129.) 15 On April 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request pursuant to Federal 16 Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) to dismiss its remaining claims with prejudice and 17 Defendants’ counterclaims without prejudice. (ECF No. 136.) 18 19 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that: 1. Pursuant to the Court’s Order Granting Defendants’ Motion for Partial 21 Summary Judgment (ECF No. 129), and Order on Plaintiff’s Request 22 (ECF No. 136), judgment is entered in favor of Defendants and against 23 Plaintiff on Plaintiff’s First Cause of Action for Trademark 24 Counterfeiting of Arcona’s ‘079 Trademark Registration pursuant to 25 the Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984; 26 27 2. Plaintiff’s Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth causes of action for trademark infringement of Arcona’s ‘079 Trademark Registration and 28 -1- 1 unfair competition (Federal and State Law), respectively, all of which 2 are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 3 3. Pursuant to the Court’s Order on Plaintiff’s Request (ECF No. 136), 4 Defendants’ counterclaims for non-infringement and cancellation of 5 Arcona’s ‘079 Trademark Registration are hereby DISMISSED 6 WITHOUT PREJUDICE; 7 4. All other dates and deadlines in this case are hereby VACATED; and 8 5. The Clerk of the Court shall close the case. 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED. 11 12 13 14 Dated: May 8, 2019 15 Hon. Otis D. Wright II 16 United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?