Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company v. Roberto Conde et al

Filing 105

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT UNDER RULE 54(b) INCLUDING PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AS TO DEFENDANT MARCOS BURGOS by Judge John W. Holcomb. It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows: Burgos is permanently enjoined and restrained: Fro m directly or indirectly engaging in any further trademark counterfeiting, trademark infringement, trademark dilution, unfair competition, or deceptive business practices relating to the Subject Trademarks, including the SKITTLES Mark and Trade Dress, the STARBURST Mark and Trade Dress, the LIFE SAVERS Mark and Trade Dress, the SNICKERS Mark and Trade Dress, and the 3 MUSKETEERS Mark and Trade Dress, or any other trademarks or trade dress owned by Plaintiffs; From making , manufacturing, advertising, marketing, offering, selling, or distributing any products that feature, copy, imitate, simulate, or are confusingly similar to, or are likely to dilute the distinctive nature of, or tarnish the goodwill of, the S ubject Trademarks, including the SKITTLES Mark and Trade Dress, the STARBURST Mark and Trade Dress, the LIFE SAVERS Mark and Trade Dress, the SNICKERS Mark and Trade Dress, and the 3 MUSKETEERS Mark and Trade Dress, or any other trademarks or tra de dress owned by Plaintiffs. This Final Judgment by Consent shall have no effect on any of Plaintiffs claims against any other defendants to this action besides Burgos. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action, as it relates to Burgos, to enforce this Final Judgment by Consent and the terms of the Settlement Agreement. IT IS SO ORDERED. (See document for further details) (yl)

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 1 of 20 Page ID #:1303

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
12

WM. WRIGLEY JR. COMPANY, a
Delaware corporation; and MARS,
INCORPORATED, a Delaware
corporation,

13

Plaintiffs,

11

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

v.
ROBERTO CONDE d/b/a
2020EDIBLEZ, an individual; JOEL
LEDESMA d/b/a INLAND EMPIRE
420 SUPPLY, an individual; JESSICA
MOHR, an individual; STEPHEN
MATA d/b/a OC 420 COLLECTION,
an individual; YAUHENIYA LIS d/b/a
GASBUDS, an individual; EDWARD
AWAD d/b/a CANNABIS 420
SUPPLY, an individual; GREEN RUSH
EXTRACTS LLC, a California limited
liability company; MARCO BURGOS
d/b/a 2020EDIBLEZ, an individual; and
DOES 4 through 10,

Case No.: 5:21-cv-00777 JWH
(SHKx)
FINAL JUDGMENT BY
CONSENT UNDER RULE 54(b)
INCLUDING PERMANENT
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AS TO
DEFENDANT MARCOS BURGOS

Defendants.

24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE: MARCOS
BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 2 of 20 Page ID #:1304

This matter having come before the Court for the entry of Final Judgment by

1
2

Consent Under Rule 54(b) Including Permanent Injunctive Relief as to Defendant

3

Marcos Burgos (“Burgos”) 1, with the consent of plaintiffs Wm. Wrigley Jr.

4

Company (“Wrigley”) and Mars, Incorporated (“Mars,” and, together with Wrigley,

5

“Plaintiffs”) and Burgos (Plaintiffs and Burgos are collectively referred to herein as

6

the “Parties,” and each individually as a “Party”), in accordance with Rule 54(b) of

7

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and

8

DECREED as follows:
1.

9
10

personal jurisdiction over him. Burgos waives all defenses of lack of jurisdiction

11

over his person, improper venue, insufficiency of process, and insufficiency of

12

service of process.

13

2.

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action.

14

3.

The Parties agree to submit to the jurisdiction of this Court to enforce

15

the provisions of this Final Judgment by Consent Under Rule 54(b) Including

16

Permanent Injunctive Relief as to Defendant Marcos Burgos (the “Final Judgment

17

by Consent”) worldwide.
4.

18
19
21

5.

Plaintiff Mars is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business at 6885 Elm Street, McLean, Virginia 22101.
6.

22
23

Plaintiff Wrigley is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business at 1132 West Blackhawk Street, Chicago, Illinois 60642.

20

Defendant Burgos is an individual residing in Riverside County,

California.
7.

24

Wrigley is a recognized global leader in confections and, together with

25

its affiliates, offers a wide range of product offerings including gum, mints, and

26

candies. Wrigley markets products under dozens of well-known, distinctive, and

27
28
Loeb & Loeb

Burgos has been properly served and consents to the Court exercising

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

Defendant Marcos Burgos was erroneously named as Marco Burgos in
Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint [Dkt. No. 76].
1

2

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 3 of 20 Page ID #:1305

1

famous brands, including SKITTLES®, STARBURST®, LIFE SAVERS®,

2

DOUBLEMINT®, and JUICY FRUIT®, to name a few.

3

8.

Wrigley and its predecessors have long marketed candy and related

4

products under the famous SKITTLES® mark and trade dress, which features,

5

among other things, the word mark SKITTLES® in white block lettering, distinctive

6

rainbow designs, distinctive candy-coated lentils with an “S” imprinted thereon, and

7

a cascade design of these candy lentils (hereinafter referred to as the “Skittles Trade

8

Dress”), examples of which are shown below:

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

3

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 4 of 20 Page ID #:1306

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

For 50 years, Wrigley and its predecessors-in-interest have

10

continuously used the SKITTLES® mark to advertise, promote, and sell candy

11

throughout the United States.

12

10.

Wrigley has earned billions of dollars in revenues from the sale of

13

SKITTLES® candy in the United States. Many millions of people throughout the

14

country have purchased or consumed SKITTLES® candy. In fact, SKITTLES®

15

candy has been the best-selling non-chocolate candy in the United States for years.

16

11.

Wrigley has invested many millions of dollars to promote SKITTLES®

17

candy. Wrigley’s advertisements and commercials for SKITTLES® have been seen

18

by many millions of people nationwide. Wrigley advertises SKITTLES® candy

19

during the Super Bowl and other highly watched events.

20

12.

Based on the wide-spread and long-standing use and recognition of the

21

SKITTLES® brand, Wrigley enjoys extensive trademark rights in the SKITTLES®

22

mark and the Skittles Trade Dress.

23

Loeb & Loeb

9.

13.

Wrigley owns numerous federal registrations for its SKITTLES® mark

24

and the Skittles Trade Dress, including, but not limited to, U.S. Reg. Nos.

25

1,221,105; 2,535,714; 4,377,303; and 4,983,664 (such federal registrations,

26

collectively with the common law trademark rights in the SKITTLES® mark and

27

Skittles Trade Dress, are hereinafter referred to as the “SKITTLES® Mark and

28

Trade Dress”).

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

4

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 5 of 20 Page ID #:1307

1

14.

Similarly, Wrigley and its predecessors have long marketed candy and

2

related products under the famous STARBURST® mark and trade dress, which

3

features, among other things, the word mark STARBURST® in stylized lettering

4

and distinctive wrappers with an “S” imprinted thereon (hereinafter referred to as

5

the “Starburst Trade Dress”), examples of which are shown below:

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

For 50 years, Wrigley and its predecessors-in-interest have

21

continuously used the STARBURST® mark to advertise, promote, and sell candy

22

throughout the United States.

23

16.

Wrigley has earned billions of dollars in revenue from the sale of

24

STARBURST® candy in the United States. Many millions of people throughout

25

the country have purchased or consumed STARBURST® candy.

26

Loeb & Loeb

15.

17.

Wrigley has invested many millions of dollars to promote

27

STARBURST® candy. Wrigley’s advertisements and commercials for

28

STARBURST® have been seen by many millions of people nationwide.

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

5

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 6 of 20 Page ID #:1308

1

18.

Based on the wide-spread and long-standing use and recognition of the

2

STARBURST® brand, Wrigley enjoys extensive trademark rights in the

3

STARBURST® mark and the Starburst Trade Dress.

4

19.

Wrigley owns numerous federal registrations for its STARBURST®

5

mark and trade dress, including, but not limited to, U.S. Reg. Nos. 1,000,007;

6

1,545,544; 4,179,436; 4,268,392; and 4,625,960 (such federal registrations,

7

collectively with the common law trademark rights in the STARBURST® mark and

8

Starburst Trade Dress, are hereinafter referred to as the “STARBURST® Mark and

9

Trade Dress”).

10

20.

Additionally, Wrigley and its predecessors have long marketed candy

11

and related products under the famous LIFE SAVERS® mark and trade dress,

12

which features, among other things, the word mark LIFE SAVERS® in stylized

13

lettering and distinctive circular candies with “LIFE SAVERS” imprinted thereon

14

(hereinafter referred to as the “Life Savers Trade Dress”). An example of LIFE

15

SAVERS® packaging is shown below:

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

6

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 7 of 20 Page ID #:1309

1

For 50 years, Wrigley and its predecessors-in-interest have

2

continuously used the LIFE SAVERS® mark to advertise, promote, and sell candy

3

throughout the United States.

4

22.

Wrigley has earned billions of dollars in revenue from the sale of LIFE

5

SAVERS® candy in the United States. Many millions of people throughout the

6

country have purchased or consumed LIFE SAVERS® candy.

7

23.

Wrigley has invested many millions of dollars to promote LIFE

8

SAVERS® candy. Wrigley’s advertisements and commercials for LIFE SAVERS®

9

have been seen by many millions of people nationwide.

10

24.

Based on the wide-spread and long-standing use and recognition of the

11

LIFE SAVERS® brand, Wrigley enjoys extensive trademark rights in the LIFE

12

SAVERS® mark and the Life Savers Trade Dress.

13

25.

Wrigley owns numerous federal registrations for its LIFE SAVERS®

14

mark and trade dress, including, but not limited to, U.S. Reg. Nos. 115,895;

15

236,694; 1,130,067; 2,358,709; 4,214,036; and 4,769,489 (such federal registrations

16

collectively with the common law trademark rights in the LIFE SAVERS® mark

17

and Life Savers Trade Dress, are hereinafter referred to as the “LIFE SAVERS®

18

Mark and Trade Dress”).

19

26.

Mars is a recognized global leader in chocolates, confections, and other

20

food products. Mars offers a wide range of product offerings, including chocolate

21

bars, under dozens of well-known, distinctive, and famous brands, including

22

SNICKERS®, 3 MUSKETEERS®, MILKY WAY®, M&M’S®, and TWIX®, to

23

name a few.

24

Loeb & Loeb

21.

27.

Mars has long marketed candy and related products under the famous

25

SNICKERS® mark and trade dress, which features, among other things, the word

26

mark SNICKERS® in blue block lettering in a parallelogram outlined in red

27

(hereinafter referred to as the “Snickers Trade Dress”), examples of which are

28

shown below:

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

7

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 8 of 20 Page ID #:1310

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

28.

For almost 100 years, Mars has continuously used the SNICKERS®

mark to advertise, promote, and sell chocolate bars throughout the United States.
29.

Mars has earned billions of dollars in revenues from the sale of

25

SNICKERS® candy and other SNICKERS® branded products in the United States.

26

Many millions of people throughout the country have purchased or consumed

27

SNICKERS® candy and other SNICKERS® branded products. In fact, the

28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

8

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 9 of 20 Page ID #:1311

1

SNICKERS® chocolate bar has been one of the best-selling chocolate bars in the

2

United States for years.

3

30.

Mars has invested many millions of dollars to promote SNICKERS®

4

candy. Mars’ advertisements and commercials for SNICKERS® have been seen by

5

many millions of people nationwide. Mars has advertised SNICKERS® candy

6

during the Super Bowl and other highly watched events.

7

31.

Based on the wide-spread and long-standing use and recognition of the

8

SNICKERS® brand, Mars enjoys extensive trademark rights in the SNICKERS®

9

mark and the Snickers Trade Dress.

10

32.

Mars owns numerous federal registrations for its SNICKERS® mark,

11

parallelogram design, and chocolate bar design, including, but not limited to, U.S.

12

Reg. Nos. 239,311; 1,270,149; 1,563,583; 1,593,286; 2,061,849; 2,082,946;

13

2,104,555; 2,911,432; 3,063,755; 3,120,788; 5,047,574; 6,465,002; and 6,480,397

14

(such federal registrations, collectively with the common law trademark rights in the

15

SNICKERS® mark and Snickers Trade Dress, are hereinafter referred to as the

16

“SNICKERS® Mark and Trade Dress”).

17

33.

Similarly, Mars has long marketed candy and related products under

18

the famous 3 MUSKETEERS® mark and trade dress, which features, among other

19

things, the word mark 3 MUSKETEERS® in stylized red lettering outlined in blue

20

and the number 3 inside a blue shield design (hereinafter referred to as the “3

21

Musketeers Trade Dress”), an example of which is shown below:

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

9

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 10 of 20 Page ID
#:1312

1
2
3

34.

For 90 years, Mars has continuously used the 3 MUSKETEERS® mark

to advertise, promote, and sell chocolate bars throughout the United States.
35.

Mars has earned millions of dollars in revenues from the sale of 3

4

MUSKETEERS® candy in the United States. Many millions of people throughout

5

the country have purchased or consumed 3 MUSKETEERS® chocolate products.

6

In fact, the 3 MUSKETEERS® chocolate bar has been a popular chocolate bar in

7

the United States for years.

8
9
10
11

36.

Mars has invested many millions of dollars to promote 3

MUSKETEERS® candy. Mars’ advertisements and commercials for 3
MUSKETEERS® have been seen by many millions of people nationwide.
37.

Based on the wide-spread and long-standing use and recognition of the

12

3 MUSKETEERS® brand, Mars enjoys extensive trademark rights in the 3

13

MUSKETEERS® mark and the 3 Musketeers Trade Dress.

14

38.

Mars owns federal registrations for its 3 MUSKETEERS® mark and

15

the 3-shield design, including, but not limited to, U.S. Reg. Nos. 1,272,036;

16

1,683,918; 2,675,569; 3,338,622; and 5,596,164 (such federal registrations,

17

collectively with the common law trademark rights in the 3 MUSKETEERS® mark

18

and 3 Musketeers Trade Dress, are hereinafter referred to as the “3

19

MUSKETEERS® Mark and Trade Dress”).

20

39.

Each of the above-referenced trademark registrations are valid,

21

subsisting, and in full force under 15 U.S.C. § 1065, and, together with Plaintiffs’

22

extensive common law rights, make the SKITTLES® Mark and Trade Dress,

23

STARBURST® Mark and Trade Dress, and LIFE SAVERS® Mark and Trade

24

Dress (collectively, the “Wrigley Trademarks”), and the SNICKERS® Mark and

25

Trade Dress and 3 MUSKETEERS® Mark and Trade Dress (collectively, the “Mars

26

Trademarks” and, together with the Wrigley Trademarks, the “Subject

27

Trademarks”) valuable assets owned by Plaintiffs.

28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

10

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 11 of 20 Page ID
#:1313

1
2
3
4
5

40.

Burgos helped engage in the marketing and offering for sale of edible

cannabis candy products.
41.

Burgos promoted third parties which used the Subject Trademarks,

without authorization or license, in the marketing of his products.
42.

Specifically, Burgos has helped engage in the marketing of products

6

online via the 2020ediblez website, located at https://www.2020ediblez.com/, which

7

violated Plaintiffs’ rights in the Subject Trademarks. Those products include:

8

(1) “Skittles 500mg” (sold in four flavors: “Green,” “Yellow,” “Blue,” and

9

“Purple”); (2) “Sour candy coated chews 500mg”; (3) “Candy coated fruit chews

10

Medicated 10 pack”; (4) “Cannaburst 500mg Starburst Gummies Edibles” (sold in

11

three flavors: “Sours,” “Berry,” and “Tropical”); (5) “Starbuds Gummies” (sold in

12

two flavors: “Sour Berry” and “Original”); (6) “Lifesavers Medicated Gummies

13

600mg”; (7) “Berry ring medicated gummies 600mg”; (8) “Life Savers CBD

14

Gummies 200mg”; (9) “Berry Ring cbd gummies 200mg”; (10) “1000mg THC wax

15

bar w peanuts and caramel (10-Pack)”; (11) “3 Marijuanas chocolate bar 100mg

16

(10-Pack)”; and (12) “1000mg chocolate candy – Medicated edibles (SINGLE

17

BAR).” These products, collectively referred to as the “2020ediblez Infringing

18

Products,” are pictured below as they appear or appeared on 2020ediblez’s website:

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

11

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 12 of 20 Page ID
#:1314

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

12

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 13 of 20 Page ID
#:1315

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

13

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 14 of 20 Page ID
#:1316

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

14

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 15 of 20 Page ID
#:1317

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

15

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 16 of 20 Page ID
#:1318

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

16

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 17 of 20 Page ID
#:1319

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

17

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 18 of 20 Page ID
#:1320

1

43.

2

disregard of, Plaintiffs’ intellectual property rights, and with the intent to take

3

advantage of the good will that Plaintiffs have developed in the Subject Trademarks.

4

44.

Burgos’ complained-of acts above constitute the following:

5

a.

6

U.S.C. § 1114;

7

b.

8
10

c.

Infringement of the Subject Trademarks in violation of 15 U.S.C.
Dilution of the inherently distinctive and famous Subject

Trademarks in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c);
d.

11
12

Counterfeiting of the Subject Trademarks in violation of 15

§§ 1114 and 1125(a);

9

Unfair competition and deceptive acts and practices in violation

of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A);
e.

13

Unlawful, unfair, and/or fraudulent acts or business practices,

14

including unfair, deceptive, untrue, and misleading advertising, in violation of

15

California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq.;
f.

16

Dilution of the inherently distinctive and famous Subject

17

Trademarks in violation of California Business and Professions Code

18

§ 14247;

19

g.

Unfair competition and deceptive acts and practices in violation

20

of common law.

21

45.

This is an exceptional case in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 1117.

22

46.

Burgos is permanently enjoined and restrained:

23

Loeb & Loeb

Burgos took such actions with full knowledge of, and in willful

a.

From directly or indirectly engaging in any further trademark

24

counterfeiting, trademark infringement, trademark dilution, unfair

25

competition, or deceptive business practices relating to the Subject

26

Trademarks, including the SKITTLES® Mark and Trade Dress, the

27

STARBURST® Mark and Trade Dress, the LIFE SAVERS® Mark and

28

Trade Dress, the SNICKERS® Mark and Trade Dress, and the 3

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

18

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 19 of 20 Page ID
#:1321

1

MUSKETEERS® Mark and Trade Dress, or any other trademarks or trade

2

dress owned by Plaintiffs;
b.

3
4

selling, or distributing any products that feature, copy, imitate, simulate, or

5

are confusingly similar to, or are likely to dilute the distinctive nature of, or

6

tarnish the goodwill of, the Subject Trademarks, including the SKITTLES®

7

Mark and Trade Dress, the STARBURST® Mark and Trade Dress, the LIFE

8

SAVERS® Mark and Trade Dress, the SNICKERS® Mark and Trade Dress,

9

and the 3 MUSKETEERS® Mark and Trade Dress, or any other trademarks

10

or trade dress owned by Plaintiffs;
c.

11

From representing by any means whatsoever, directly or

12

indirectly, that any products sold or services rendered by Burgos are

13

associated with, sponsored by, licensed by, and/or connected or affiliated with

14

Plaintiffs, or from otherwise taking any action likely to cause confusion,

15

mistake, or deception on the part of purchasers as to the origin or licensing of

16

Burgos’ products or services;
d.

17
18
20

From otherwise competing unfairly with Plaintiffs in any manner

or engaging in deceptive conduct;
e.

19

Loeb & Loeb

From making, manufacturing, advertising, marketing, offering,

From continuing to perform in any manner whatsoever any of the

acts complained of in the First Amended Complaint as to Plaintiffs; and

21

f.

From causing, engaging in, or permitting others to do any of the

22

aforesaid acts.

23

47.

Burgos shall immediately recall from all distribution channels any

24

products, packaging, advertising, and promotional materials bearing or infringing on

25

the Subject Trademarks, including the SKITTLES® Mark and Trade Dress,

26

STARBURST® Mark and Trade Dress, LIFE SAVERS® Mark and Trade Dress,

27

SNICKERS® Mark and Trade Dress, 3 MUSKETEERS® Mark and Trade Dress, or

28

any other trademarks or trade dress owned by Plaintiffs.

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

19

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS

Case 5:21-cv-00777-JWH-SHK Document 105 Filed 01/17/23 Page 20 of 20 Page ID
#:1322

1

48.

Burgos shall immediately deliver to Plaintiffs’ counsel for destruction

2

any products, packaging, advertising, and promotional materials that are in his

3

possession, custody, or control, bearing or infringing on the Subject Trademarks,

4

including the SKITTLES® Mark and Trade Dress, STARBURST® Mark and Trade

5

Dress, LIFE SAVERS® Mark and Trade Dress, SNICKERS® Mark and Trade

6

Dress, 3 MUSKETEERS® Mark and Trade Dress, or any other trademarks or trade

7

dress owned by Plaintiffs, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1118. Any electronic equivalents

8

of such materials shall be immediately deleted.

9

49.

Burgos shall immediately cease sales of the products described above

10

in any location on the Internet, including any other websites owned or operated by

11

Burgos or any of his affiliates, and any social media platforms owned or operated by

12

Burgos or any of his affiliates. Burgos shall immediately account for and disgorge

13

to Plaintiffs any profits wrongfully derived by his unlawful conduct.

14

50.

The Parties shall comply with the terms of the confidential settlement

15

agreement entered into by and between the Parties and executed concurrently with

16

their stipulation to this Final Judgment by Consent (the “Settlement Agreement”),

17

the terms of which are incorporated herein by reference.

18

51.

This Final Judgment by Consent shall have no effect on any of

19

Plaintiffs’ claims against any other defendants to this action besides Burgos.

20

Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action,

21

as it relates to Burgos, to enforce this Final Judgment by Consent and the terms of

22

the Settlement Agreement.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25
26

Dated:

January 17 , 2023

The Honorable John W. Holcomb
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28
Loeb & Loeb

A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional
Corporations

20

FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT RE:
MARCOS BURGOS