Hyperheal Hyperbarics, Inc. v. Shapiro

Filing 51

MEMORANDUM ORDER re: 49 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed by Hyperheal Hyperbarics, Inc. shall be referred to a Magistrate judge, who will issue proposed findings of fact and recommendations to the District judge. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 1/15/2019. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk)

•

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

HYPERHEAL

HYPERBARICS,

INC.,

*

Plaintiff,
v.

Civil Action No. RDB-18-1679

*
*

ERIC SHAPIRO,

*

Defendant.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

MEMORANDUM

*

*

*

*

*

ORDER

Currently pending before this Court is Hyperheal

Hyperbarics,

Inc.'s ("Hyperheal")

Motion to Modify Preliminary Injunction and for Sanctions. (ECr No. 49.) ror the reasons
stated herein, this Motion shall be referred to a l\lagistrate Judge for the issuance of a Report
and Recommendation.
On August 2, 2018 Hyperheal filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (ECr No. 31.)
On August 15 and 17,2018 this Court conducted a preliminary injunction hearing. (ECF Nos.
36,39.)

On September 6, 2018 this Court entered a Preliminary Injunction Order (ECF No.

45), enjoining Eric Shapiro from (1) asserting control over web domain names containing the
phrase "l-Iyperheal"

or any other intellectual

property

using the name "Hyperheal";

(2)

pursuing the "l-Iyperheal l-Iyperbarics, Inc." trademark application; (3) attempting to control
the name "l-Iyperheal";

and (4) using in commerce

"l-Iyperheal."

1

the trademarks

"l-Iyperheal 02"

and

Hyperheal's

recent Motion

(ECl" No. 49) seeks a modification

injunction order and for sanctions against Eric Shapiro.
produce a confidentialiry

of the preliminary

It argues that (1) Shapiro failed to

agreement as required by this Court's August 17 bench order; (2)

Shapiro falsely testified to this Court during the preliminary injunction
failed to transfer ownership

hearing; (3) Shapiro

and control over all web domains containing "Hyperheal";

and

(4) Shapiro likely destroyed emails from his Hyperheal email account shortly after the .August
17 hearing. The Motion attaches several exhibits to bolster these claims.
Because this Court is conducting a multi-week bench trial, it is unable to grant a hearing
on Hyperheal's 1\lotion or rule upon the Motion in a timely manner. Accordingly, Hyperheal's
Motion to Modify Preliminary Injunction and for Sanctions shall be referred to a Magistrate
judge for the issuance of a report and recommendation

pursuant to Local Rule 301.5(a)-(b)

(D. Md. 2018); 28 U.S.c. ~ 636(b)(I)(A) and (B). See also Metro. Reg'IIlIfo. Sys., lilt. v. Am. Home
Realty Network, lilt., A\'\1-12-954, 2013 W'L 2444132 (D. Md. 2013) (issuing report

and

recommendation

and

recommending

finding

that

party

had

\'iolated

preliminary

injunction

order

contempt remedy).

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED

this 15th day of january, 2019 that:

1) Hyperheal's Motion to Modify Preliminary Injunction and for Sanctions (ECl" No. 49)
shall be referred to a Magistrate judge, who ,,~ll issue proposed findings of fact and
recommendations to the District judge.
2) The Clerk of Court shall transmit a copy of this Order to all counsel of record.

~

X"it5

Richard D. Bennett
United States District judge

2