Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. Akanoc Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 161

Proposed Jury Instructions by Akanoc Solutions, Inc., Managed Solutions Group, Inc., Steven Chen DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED MODEL JURY INSTRUCTIONS. (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Jury Instruction #1, # 2 Supplemental Jury Instruction #2, # 3 Supplemental Jury Instruction #3, # 4 Supplemental Jury Instruction #4, # 5 Supplemental Jury Instruction #5, # 6 Supplemental Jury Instruction #6, # 7 Supplemental Jury Instruction #7, # 8 Supplemental Jury Instruction #8, # 9 Supplemental Jury Instruction #9, # 10 Supplemental Jury Instruction #10, # 11 Supplemental Jury Instruction #11, # 12 Supplemental Jury Instruction #12, # 13 Supplemental Jury Instruction #13, # 14 Supplemental Jury Instruction #14, # 15 Supplemental Jury Instruction #15, # 16 Supplemental Jury Instruction #16, # 17 Supplemental Jury Instruction #17, # 18 Supplemental Jury Instruction #18, # 19 Supplemental Jury Instruction #20, # 20 Supplemental Jury Instruction #21, # 21 Supplemental Jury Instruction #22, # 22 Supplemental Jury Instruction #23)(Lowe, James) (Filed on 6/5/2009)

Download PDF
Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. Akanoc Solutions, Inc. et al Doc. 161 Att. 15 Case5:07-cv-03952-JW Document161-16 Filed06/05/09 Page1 of 3 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 GAUNTLETT & ASSOCIATES David A. Gauntlett (SBN 96399) James A. Lowe (SBN 214383) Brian S. Edwards (SBN 166258) Christopher Lai (SBN 249425) 18400 Von Karman, Suite 300 Irvine, California 92612 Telephone: (949) 553-1010 Facsimile: (949) 553-2050 info@gauntlettlaw.com jal@gauntlettlaw.com bse@gauntlettlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants Akanoc Solutions, Inc., Managed Solutions Group, Inc. and Steve Chen UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION LOUIS VUITTON MALLETIER, S.A., ) Case No.: C 07-3952 JW (HRL) ) ) Plaintiff, ) SUPPLEMENTAL JURY ) INSTRUCTION NO. 16 vs. ) ) ) ) AKANOC SOLUTIONS, INC., MANAGED SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC., STEVEN CHEN ) AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, ) ) ) Defendants. ) ) 163878.1-10562-002-6/5/2009 SUPPLEMENTAL JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 16 C 07-3952 JW Dockets.Justia.com Case5:07-cv-03952-JW Document161-16 Filed06/05/09 Page2 of 3 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 163878.1-10562-002-6/5/2009 JURY INSTRUCTION No. ____ DAMAGES--WILLFUL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT If you find that a defendant contributorily infringed any of Louis Vuitton's trademarks you must also determine whether that defendant's conduct was intentional or willful. Willfulness carries a connotation of a deliberate intent to deceive. In order to find that a defendant's contributory infringement was intentional or willful, you must find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant(s) deliberately intended to deceive Louis Vuitton. 2 SUPPLEMENTAL JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 16 C 07-3952 JW Case5:07-cv-03952-JW Document161-16 Filed06/05/09 Page3 of 3 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 Ninth Circuit Model Civil Jury Instruction 15.27 Trademark Damages Intentional Infringement Collegenet, Inc. v. XAP Corp., 483 F.Supp.2d 1058, 1065 (D.Or.2007) ("A finding of willful misconduct under the Lanham Act must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. [citing Tamko Roofing Prods., Inc. v. Ideal Roofing Co., Ltd., 294 F.3d 227, 229 (1st Cir.2002); Versa Prods. Co., Inc. v. Bifold Co. (Mfg.) Ltd., 50 F.3d 189, 208 (3d Cir.1995); Castrol, Inc. v. Pennzoil Quaker State Co., 169 F.Supp.2d 332, 341 & n. 8 (D.N.J.2001)].") Lindy Pen Co., Inc. v. Bic Pen Corp., 982 F.2d 1400, 1406 (9th Cir.1993) ("Willful infringement carries a connotation of deliberate intent to deceive. Courts generally apply forceful labels such as "deliberate," "false," "misleading," or "fraudulent" to conduct that meets this standard.") 163878.1-10562-002-6/5/2009 3 SUPPLEMENTAL JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 16 C 07-3952 JW

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?