Corona v. Ramos

Filing 19

JUDGMENT dated *5/4/2018* in favor of Plaintiff against Defendant pursuant to order signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/4/2018.(Washington, S)

1
2
3
4

STEVEN J. EYRE, CB# 119714
3550 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 420
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90010
[phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]

5
6

Attorney for Plaintiff

7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

501 “I” Street, Sacramento, California 95814

12
13

STIPULATED JUDGMENT AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTION

Plaintiff,

14
15

No. 2:17-CV-02064-TLN-KJN

JUAN CORONA,

-vs.-

16
17
18
19

PEDRO RAMOS PKA PALILLO
PALMA, DOES 1-10,
Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Plaintiff Juan Corona filed this action for federal trademark infringement and
unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A), for state law trade name
infringement and unfair competition under California Business & Professions Code
§§ 17200 et seq., false advertising under California Business & Professions Code
§§ 17500 et seq. and for common law interference with prospective business
advantage, accounting and injunctive relief. The parties to this action have
stipulated to settlement of this action without adjudication of any issue of fact or

-1Corona vs. Ramos/2:17-cv-02064-TLN-KJN

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

law.

1

THEREFORE, based upon the stipulation of the parties, it is hereby

2

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:1

3

FINDINGS

4

1.

5

This Court has jurisdiction over the claims brought by plaintiff under

6

28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1138(a), and under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A), as well as

7

over plaintiff’s supplemental state law claims, as provided under 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

8

This Court has jurisdiction over the parties.
2.

9

Venue in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of

10

California (“this federal district”) is proper as defendant Pedro Ramos pka Palillo

11

Palma is a resident of the city of Lodi, California and of this federal district.
3.

12

Plaintiff Juan Corona is owner in the United States of the marks

13

EXTERMINADOR and GRUPO EXTERMINADOR with respect to services,

14

namely live performances of a musical band, and goods, namely sound recordings.
4.

15

The Complaint herein states claims against defendant upon which

relief can be granted.

16

5.

17

Defendant Ramos has engaged in actions complained of in plaintiff’s

18

Complaint herein within the state of California and this federal district, as well as

19

elsewhere in the United States.
6.

20

Defendant has entered into a Stipulation for Entry of a Stipulated

21

Judgment and Permanent Injunction (hereafter “Stipulation”) freely and without

22

coercion.
7.

23

Defendant has acknowledged that he has read the provisions of the

24

Stipulation as well as this Stipulated Judgment and Permanent Injunction (hereafter

25

“Judgment”) and will abide by them.
8.

26

challenge or contest the validity of this Judgment.

27
28

Plaintiff and Defendant have waived all rights to appeal or otherwise

1

Both parties consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate
Judge for all purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (ECF Nos. 15, 17.)

-2Corona vs. Ramos/2:17-cv-02064-TLN-KJN

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

ORDER

1
2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

3

1.

4
5

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and

the parties hereto.
2.

Judgment is hereby entered in favor of plaintiff Juan Corona and

6

against defendant Pedro Ramos pka Palillo Palma on all causes of action of the

7

Complaint.

8
9

3. Defendant, his officers, agents, servants and employees, and those
persons in active concert or participation with the foregoing who receive actual

10

notice of this Order by personal service or otherwise are hereby PERMANENTLY

11

ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from engaging in or performing any of the

12

following acts:

13

(a) using the GRUPO EXTERMINADOR mark or trade name alone or in

14

combination with any other words or symbols which so resemble plaintiff’s mark and

15

name “Grupo Exterminador,” including without limitation “Nuevo Exterminador”

16

and “Exterminador,” as to be likely to cause confusion, deception or mistake, on or in

17

connection with the advertising, offering for sale, or sale of any product or service

18

which is not plaintiff’s or not authorized by plaintiff to be sold in connection with

19

each of said marks and name;

20

(b) contacting promoters, advertisers or other businesses for the purpose of

21

offering the services of defendant as “Grupo Exterminador” or any confusingly

22

similar or colorable imitation of the “Grupo Exterminador” name, including without

23

limitation “Nuevo Exterminador” or “Exterminador”;

24

(c) using any trademark, trade name, logo, business name or other identifier

25

or acting in any fashion which may be calculated to falsely represent that the goods

26

and services provided, promoted or offered by defendant are sponsored by,

27

authorized by, licensed by, or in any other way associated with plaintiff;

28

-3Corona vs. Ramos/2:17-cv-02064-TLN-KJN

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

1

(d) engaging in any other activity constituting an infringement of plaintiff’s

2

mark or trade name or of plaintiff’s rights in, or right to use or to exploit said mark or

3

trade name;

4
5
6

(e) doing or causing to be done any further acts in violation of California
Business and Professions Code § 17500 et seq.; and
(f) assisting, aiding or abetting any other person or business entity in

7

engaging in or performing any of the activities referred to in subparagraphs (a)

8

through (e) above.

9

4. This Court shall have continuing jurisdiction over the Stipulation and the

10

Stipulated Judgment of Permanent Injunction and over the parties to enforce the

11

terms of the same and to hear motions and applications for contempt or any other

12

related matter.

13

5. The Court orders that plaintiff is entitled to conduct post-judgment

14

discovery for the purpose of determining compliance and enforcing the terms of

15

the Stipulation and the Stipulated Judgment and Permanent Injunction.

16

6. Defendant is ordered to execute and submit to plaintiff’s counsel an

17

acknowledgement of receipt of this Order within five (5) days of receipt of a

18

Notice of Entry of the Order and service of the Order upon him.

19
20
21

7. In light of the foregoing, plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (ECF
No. 13) is DENIED as moot.
8. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and close this case.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24

Dated: May 4, 2018

25
26
27
28

-4Corona vs. Ramos/2:17-cv-02064-TLN-KJN

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION