Re/Max LLC. v. Le et al
Filing
51
ORDER RE: REMOVAL OF INFRINGING "AMAX" MARK 40 41 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 7/25/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
No. C 13-02625 SI
REMAX, LLC,
ORDER RE: REMOVAL OF
INFRINGING “AMAX” MARK
Plaintiff,
v.
MIN LE, et al.,
Defendants.
/
16
17
On July 25, 2014, the Court held a further hearing regarding the status of defendant Le’s efforts
18
to have the infringing “Amax” mark removed from various websites and advertisements. On November
19
8, 2013, the Court issued judgment against defendants and ordered that they “cease using [the] Amax
20
mark within 60 days.” Docket No. 30. Despite this Court’s judgment, as of the July 25, 2014 hearing,
21
there are numerous websites that still advertise or list the “Amax” mark.
22
As discussed at the hearing, the Court ORDERS defendant Le to take whatever further steps are
23
necessary to have “Amax” removed from the twenty websites listed on pages 2-4 of the July 24, 2014
24
declaration of Ben Davidson. See Docket No. 50 at 2-4. These steps include, but are not limited to,
25
furnishing a copy of this order to the website operators, making phone calls to the appropriate people
26
at the websites regarding removing “Amax” from the websites, and making any follow up inquiries
27
necessary to ensure that the “Amax” mark has been removed from the websites. If defendant encounters
28
any difficulties with regard to having “Amax” removed from the websites, defendant is directed to
1
promptly contact Mr. Davidson, as Mr. Davidson has offered to assist plaintiff in this process. Plaintiff
2
is also authorized to distribute this order, and any other Court order or judgment, as necessary to
3
effectuate the removal of “Amax” from websites or other advertisements.
4
5
Defendant is further ordered to change the phone number for his business within 45 days of the
filing date of this order.
6
The Court will hold a further hearing on this matter at 9:00 a.m. on August 8, 2014. As the
7
Court informed defendant at the July 25, 2014 hearing, if defendant has not had “Amax” removed from
8
the twenty websites by August 8, 2014, or demonstrated good cause for failing to do so, the Court will
9
find defendant in civil contempt of this Court’s orders and defendant will be subject to a daily fine until
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
defendant fully complies with the Court’s orders.
11
12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
14
Dated: July 25, 2014
SUSAN ILLSTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15
16
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?