Filing 66

Amended CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN TENDERED, filed by Plaintiff STELOR PRODUCTIONS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Case Management Summary)(Kaplan, Kevin) Modified on 9/5/2007 (LSC).

Download PDF
STELOR PRODUCTIONS, INC. v. OOGLES N GOOGLES et al Doc. 66 Att. 1 Case 1:05-cv-00354-DFH-TAB Document 66-2 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 1 of 2 MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S SUMMARY OF CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN Date Approved: Caption: Stelor Productions, Inc., Plaintiff vs. Oogles N Googles, Kevin Mendell, Danya Mendell, and X., Y, Z Corporations Defendants Pltf's Counsel: Defts' Counsel: Nature of Case: Kevin C. Kaplan 305-858-2900 John David Hoover 317-822-4400 Stephen L. Vaughan 317-822-0033 Plaintiff Stelor Productions, Inc. brings this action for Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal and State Unfair Competition, and Federal Trademark Dilution against Defendants. Plaintiff provides entertainment, information and goods for children. Its products are based on four lovable alien creatures called "Googles." Plaintiff is the exclusive worldwide licensee for the terms and/or designs Googles, Oggle, Ooggle and Iggle, which are registered and incontestable trademarks. Plaintiff markets it products and information through, among other outlets, its Internet domain name "" Defendant Oogles N Googles and its principal, Defendant Kevin Mendell, infringed and otherwise violated Plaintiff's rights by marketing children's entertainment services under the name "Oogles-N-Googles," including over Internet domain name "" Defendant Mendel has also filed registration applications for the mark and design "Oogles-NGoogles." Defendants have sold franchises of its business to the remaining named defendants. Plaintiff seeks temporary and injunctive relief, actual, statutory, extraordinary, punitive and trebled damages, and imposition of a constructive trust, disgorgement of trebled profits from Defendants, reasonable attorneys' fees, and costs. Cause No.: 1:05-CV-0354-DFH-TAB Case 1:05-cv-00354-DFH-TAB Document 66-2 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 2 of 2 Defenses: The Defendants would contend that there is no liability for any of the damages sought by the Plaintiff. Defendant, Oogles N Googles, is in the business of providing themed parties, e.g. birthday parties, to individuals with children, where the parents wish to avoid all the hassles and problems associated with putting together a party themselves. Defendant activities are not infringing the trademark of the Plaintiff for any number of reasons, including, but not limited to: no likelihood of confusion; no false designation or description; plaintiff is not competitive with Defendant; non-use; the doctrine of unclean hands; fair use; laches and estoppel; no dilution can occur as plaintiff=s mark is not famous. The avenues of marketing the products are distinct as well as the target consumer. Additionally, the Plaintiff has no products or services that are competitive with Defendants. Discovery: Readiness: Trial Time: Motions Pending: Motions Future: Pltf's Demand: Settlement: Remarks: Non-Expert Discovery Completed by May 16, 2008; Expert Discovery by June 17, 2008. Trial: August 2008 3 days - by jury None Amend pleadings/add parties by January 15, 2008; Summary judgment by April 1, 2008. Due January 15, 2008 Defense Offer: Due February 15, 2008 The parties may request a follow up settlement conference with the Magistrate at a later time. (for court's use)

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?