Sream Inc v. Sun Kyung Cho et al

Filing 27

STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST FOUR ACES WHOLESALE CORP by Judge Virginia A. Phillips, Related to: Stipulation for Judgment, Stipulation for Permanent Injunction 19 . (See document for specifics) (mrgo)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

EASTERN DIVISION

11
12

SREAM, INC, a California corporation,

Case No. 5:13-cv-02197-VAP-SP

13
Plaintiff,

14
15

v.

16

STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT
AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
AGAINST FOUR ACES
WHOLESALE, CORP.

SUN KYUNG CHO d/b/a CIGARETTE
DEPOT; DADDY’S SMOKE SHOP, INC.,
a California corporation; FOUR ACES
WHOLESALE, CORP., a California
Corporation; and DOES 1-10 INCLUSIVE,

17
18
19
20

Defendants.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] STIPLATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

1
2
3
4

FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
This Court, having made the following findings of fact and conclusions of law
pursuant to the parties’ stipulation:
A.

Plaintiff Sream, Inc. (“Sream” or “Plaintiff”) filed suit against Defendant Four

5

Aces Wholesale Corp. (“Four Aces”), alleging that Four Aces violated Sream’s rights

6

under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1116, 1125(a), (c), and (d), and Cal. Bus & Prof. § 17200 et seq.

7

(“Action”);

8
9
10
11

B.

The Parties entered into a settlement agreement as of late January 2014

(“Settlement Agreement”), which requires entry of the stipulated judgment set forth herein;
And good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED,
AND DECREED THAT:

12

1.

That judgment be entered in favor of Sream against Four Aces on all claims.

13

2.

For the purposes of binding preclusive effect on Four Aces as to future

14

disputes with respect to the Action or Settlement Agreement between Four Aces on the one

15

hand and Sream on the other hand, and only for such purposes, Four Aces admits the

16

following:

17

a. Mr. Martin Birzle is now, and has been at all times since the dates of issuance,

18

the owner of United States Trademark Registration Nos. 2,235,638; 2,307,176;

19

and 3,675,839 (the “RooR Marks”) and of all rights thereto and thereunder.
b. Since at least 2011, Plaintiff Sream has been the exclusive licensee of the

20
21

RooR Marks in the United States. Mr. Birzle has been granted all

22

enforcement rights to Sream to sue for obtain injunctive and monetary relief

23

for past and future infringement of the RooR Marks.
c. Four Aces, by the actions described in the complaint, has infringed upon the

24

RooR Marks.

25
26
27

3.

Four Aces, and those on Four Aces’s behalf, including their owners,

shareholders, principals, officers, agents, servants, employees, independent contractors,

28
2
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

1

and partners, are permanently enjoined from using the term “Sream” and confusingly

2

similar terms (collectively, the “Injunction”).

3

4.

Four Aces is bound by the Injunction regardless of whether Mr. Martin Birzle

4

assigns or licenses its intellectual property rights to another for so long as such trademark

5

rights are subsisting, valid, and enforceable. The Injunction inures to the benefit of Mr.

6

Martin Birzle’s successors, assignees, and licensees.

7

5.

This Court (or if this Court is unavailable, any court within the Central District

8

of California) shall retain jurisdiction over all disputes between and among the Parties

9

arising out of the Settlement Agreement and Injunction, the Stipulation which includes the

10

Injunction, and this final judgment, including but not limited to interpretation and

11

enforcement of the terms of the Settlement Agreement.

12
13

6.

The Parties waive any rights to appeal this stipulated judgment, including

without limitation the Injunction.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17
18

Dated: _March 06,
2014______________________

19
United States District Court Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION