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)

Download PDF
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?