QFA Royalties LLC et al v. Tasty Sub Enterprises, Inc. et al

Filing 46

ORDER. ORDERED that no party may use this Order for any purpose other than to enforce the terms of the injunctive relief set forth herein. ORDERED that this Order binds those persons described in Fed. R. Civ. P.65(d)(2). ORDERED that, pursuant to t he parties' stipulation, the Court finds that it is appropriate to order the requested injunctive relief without requiring plaintiffs or defendants to post a bond under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(c). ORDERED that the terms of this Order will remain in effect pending resolution of the parties' claims on the merits or further order of the Court. ORDERED that plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Docket No. 10] is DENIED as moot by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 05/01/15.(jhawk, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 15-cv-00407-PAB-CBS
QFA ROYALTIES LLC and
THE QUIZNO’S MASTER LLC,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TASTY SUB ENTERPRISES, INC.,
BEST SUB ENTERPRISES, INC.,
ABBAS GHANEI, and
AZITA GHANEI,
Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Docket
No. 10] filed by plaintiffs QFA Royalties LLC and The Quizno’s Master LLC. At an April
28, 2014 hearing, the parties informed the Court that they had reached an agreement to
resolve the present motion and requested that the Court enter a stipulated injunction.
Docket No. 44. The Court directed the parties to file a document setting forth the terms
of the requested injunction. On April 30, 2015, the parties jointly filed a draft order
setting forth the terms of the requested injunction. Docket No. 45. Pursuant to the
parties’ representations at the hearing, the Court construes the draft order as a
stipulation and makes the following findings:
1. Defendants are former Quizno’s franchisees who owned and operated a
franchised Quizno’s sub restaurant at 15 W . 5th Street in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

2. Defendants now operate a restaurant known as the “Downtown Deli” out of
the same 15 W. 5th Street location.
3. On March 6, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction, seeking
to enjoin defendants from infringing on plaintiffs’ trademarks and trade dress in violation
of the Lanham Act, engaging in unfair competition in violation of the Lanham Act, and
breaching post-termination non-competition obligations under the franchise agreements
between plaintiffs and defendants.
4. Without any admission of liability or wrongdoing and to avoid the expense of
further litigating plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the parties have agreed to
resolve plaintiffs’ motion according to the terms set forth below.
Wherefore, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 and the parties’ stipulation, it is
ORDERED that, on or before May 1, 2015, defendants’ Downtown Deli
restaurant will cease selling sandwiches. It may continue to sell gyros flatbreads. It is
further
ORDERED that, on or before May 29, 2015, defendants will make the following
modifications to the Downtown Deli: (1) repaint the interior walls different colors, (ii)
remove Quizno’s proprietary oven, (iii) remove Quizno’s proprietary pepper bar, and (iv)
remove or modify Quizno’s proprietary millwork, which is the woodwork that spans the
entire length of the service area from the order station to the pick-up/pay station and
includes the area underneath the sneeze guard. It is further
ORDERED that no party may use this Order for any purpose other than to
enforce the terms of the injunctive relief set forth herein. It is further

2

ORDERED that this Order binds those persons described in Fed. R. Civ. P.
65(d)(2). It is further
ORDERED that, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the Co urt finds that it is
appropriate to order the requested injunctive relief without requiring plaintiffs or
defendants to post a bond under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(c). It is further
ORDERED that the terms of this Order will remain in effect pending resolution of
the parties’ claims on the merits or further order of the Court. It is further
ORDERED that plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Docket No. 10] is
DENIED as moot.

DATED May 1, 2015.
BY THE COURT:

s/Philip A. Brimmer
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge

3