Russell Road Food and Beverage, LLC v. Galam et al
Filing
417
ORDER Granting 413 Stipulated Permanent Injunction. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 2/14/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
BRUNO TARABICHI, CA State Bar No. 215129
bruno@tmwlawfirm.com
TMW LAW
4750 Almaden Expy 124-359
San Jose, California 95118
Telephone: 408.634.0324
Facsimile: 408.715.6707
Pro Hac Vice
PUOY K. PREMSRIRUT, State Bar No. 7141
puoy@brownlawlv.com
PUOY K. PREMSRIRUT, ESQ. INC.
520 S. Fourth Street, Second Floor
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Telephone: 702.384.5563
Facsimile: 702.385.1752
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Russell Road Food and Beverage, LLC
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
13
SOUTHERN DIVISION
14
15
RUSSELL ROAD FOOD AND
BEVERAGE, LLC,
Plaintiff,
16
17
18
19
vs.
MIKE GALAM, et al.
Defendants.
MIKE GALAM, et al.,
20
Case No. 2:13-cv-00776-RFB-NJK
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER BETWEEN
PLAINTIFF RUSSELL ROAD FOOD AND
BEVERAGE, LLC AND ALL
DEFENDANTS
Case Filed: May 2, 2013
Judge:
Honorable Richard F. Boulware
Counterclaimants,
21
vs.
22
RUSSELL ROAD FOOD AND
BEVERAGE, LLC, et al.
23
24
Counterdefendant.
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
(CASE NO. 2:13-cv-00776-RFB-NJK)
1
Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 of the District of Nevada’s Local Rules of Practice,
2
Plaintiff Russell Road Food and Beverage, LLC (“Russell Road”) and Defendants Mike
3
Galam, Victor Galam, Jacqueline Galam Barnes, Crazy Horse Too Gentlemen’s Club
4
LLC, Rhino Bare Projects LLC, Rhino Bare Projects 4824 LLC, Canico Capital Group,
5
LLC, Industrial Road 2440-2497, LLC, Abraham Assil, George Eshaghian, West Best
6
Capital Group, LLC, SN & GE, LLC, Soleiman Nazarian, Djavid Hakakian, Morris
7
Nejathaim, Hamed Yazdanpanah, Isaac Javdanfar, Kamran Samooha, Mehran
8
Sadighpour, Sefox Investement, LLC, El Marino, LLC, Knotting Hill, LLC, IJ Properties,
9
LLC, and S Double, LLC (“Defendants”) (hereinafter “Enjoined Defendants”) hereby
10
stipulate and agree to the entry of a permanent injunction as set forth below.
11
THE COURT HEREBY FINDS THAT
12
1.
Russell Road prevailed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim
13
against Canico Capital Group, LLC, Industrial Road 2440-2497, LLC, Crazy Horse Too
14
Gentlemen’s Club LLC, Rhino Bare Projects LLC, Rhino Bare Projects 4824 LLC, Mike
15
Galam, Victor Galam, and Jacqueline Galam Barnes. ECF No. 375. All remaining
16
Defendants are or have been in the past associated and/or affiliated, whether directly or
17
indirectly, in some manner with Canico Capital Group, LLC, such that injunctive relief
18
against the remaining Defendants is appropriate.
19
2.
Russell Road has shown that it has suffered and is likely to continue to
20
suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a permanent injunction. Russell Road has
21
made a strong showing of irreparable harm through its submission of evidence that in
22
the absence of a permanent injunction (i) substantial actual confusion has already
23
occurred in the market; (ii) it has suffered, and will continue to suffer, intangible harm to
24
the goodwill of its CRAZY HORSE III mark, (iii) it will be unable to control and maintain
25
the reputation and perception of its CRAZY HORSE III mark, (iv) it will be unable to
26
obtain a reasonable return on its investment of millions of dollars into its CRAZY HORSE
27
III mark; and/or (v) its CRAZY HORSE III mark will be tarnished by being associated with
28
the negative reputation of the former Crazy Horse Too club.
2
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
(CASE NO. 2:13-cv-00776-RFB-NJK)
1
3.
The balance of equities tips in Russell Road’s favor. Russell Road has
2
invested a substantial amount of money into its mark and created substantial goodwill
3
and consumer recognition in its CRAZY HORSE III mark. In contrast, a permanent
4
injunction will not harm the Enjoined Defendants because it only requires the Enjoined
5
Defendants to comply with the law.
6
4.
A permanent injunction serves the public interest because it prevents
7
confusion in the market. Here, Russell Road has prevailed on the merits of its trademark
8
claim and, thus, established a likelihood of confusion. Moreover, actual confusion has
9
already occurred.
10
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT
11
1.
Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, this
12
Permanent Injunction Order binds (i) the Enjoined Defendants; (ii) the Enjoined
13
Defendants’ officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys; and (iii) all other
14
persons who are in active concert or participation with the Enjoined Defendants or the
15
Enjoined Defendants’ officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys (collectively
16
referred to as “The Enjoined Parties”).
17
2.
The Enjoined Parties are hereby enjoined from any and all use of (i) the
18
CRAZY HORSE TOO, CRAZY HORSE TOO SALOON, and CRAZY HORSE
19
trademarks and names (alone or in combination with other letters, words, or designs), (ii)
20
any trademarks incorporating the term CRAZY or HORSE or TOO (including designs
21
intended to depict the word CRAZY or HORSE or TOO), (iii) the former CRAZY HORSE
22
TOO design logos attached as Exhibit 1 hereto or any design or mark that incorporates
23
any part of those design logos, and (iv) any abbreviations of any of the foregoing marks
24
such as CH2, CH2LV, CHTOO, CHTOOLV ((i) through (iv) collectively the “Infringing
25
CRAZY HORSE TOO Marks”) in connection with the advertising, promotion, operation,
26
or provision of a gentlemen’s club or in connection with any business, goods, or services
27
in the adult entertainment industry in the State of Nevada, the United States, and
28
worldwide.
3
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
(CASE NO. 2:13-cv-00776-RFB-NJK)
1
3.
The Enjoined Parties, to the extent that they have the power and ability to
2
do so are ordered to (i) permanently remove all billboards and signage featuring the
3
Infringing CRAZY HORSE TOO Marks, to the extent such still exist; (ii) permanently
4
remove or disable all websites that feature—whether in the domain name url or website
5
itself—the Infringing CRAZY HORSE TOO Marks, to the extent such still exist; (iii)
6
permanently remove or withdraw all other promotional materials featuring the Infringing
7
CRAZY HORSE TOO Marks, to the extent such still exist; (iv) permanently remove or
8
delete all social media accounts and social media pages that contain or feature the
9
Infringing CRAZY HORSE TOO Marks (including use as usernames or hashtags or as
10
content in social media messages or on social media pages), to the extent such still
11
exist.
12
13
IT IS SO STIPULATED
14
15
Dated: February 1, 2019
Respectfully submitted,
TMW LAW
16
17
By
18
19
/s/ Bruno Tarabichi
Bruno Tarabichi
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Russell Road Food and Beverage, LLC
20
21
22
Dated: February 1, 2019
Respectfully submitted,
AKERMAN LLP
23
24
By
25
26
27
/s/ Ariel E. Stern
Ariel E. Stern
Attorneys for Defendants Canico Capital
Group, LLC, Industrial Road 2440-2497,
LLC, Abraham Assil, George Eshaghian,
West Best Capital Group, LLC, SN &
GE, LLC, and Soleiman Nazarian
28
4
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
(CASE NO. 2:13-cv-00776-RFB-NJK)
1
2
Dated: February 1, 2019
Respectfully submitted,
THE LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM H.
BROWN, LTD.
3
4
5
By
6
7
8
/s/ William Brown
William Brown
Attorneys for Defendants Mike Galam,
Crazy Horse Too Gentlemen’s Club LLC,
Victor Galam, Jaqueline Galam Barnes,
Rhino Bare Projects LLC, and Rhino
Bare Projects 4824 LLC
9
10
11
12
13
Dated: February 1, 2019
Respectfully submitted,
LEBEDEV, MICHAEL & HELMI
14
15
By
16
17
18
19
/s/ Gennady L. Lebedev
Gennady L. Lebedev
Attorneys for Defendants Djavid
Hakakian, Morris Nejathaim, Hamed
Yazdanpanah, Isaac Javdanfar, Kamran
Samooha, Mehran Sadighpour, Sefox
Investement, LLC, El Marino, LLC,
Knotting Hill, LLC, IJ Properties, LLC,
and S Double, LLC
20
21
22
IT IS SO ORDERED:
23
HON. RICHARD F. BOULWARE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
24
25
26
DATED: February 14, 2019.
27
28
5
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
(CASE NO. 2:13-cv-00776-RFB-NJK)
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?