Best Price Auto Salvage LLC v. Best Value Auto Salvage LLC

Filing 7

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER granting #4 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Best Price Auto Salvage LLC. Signed by Judge Robin J. Cauthron on 01/07/22. (wh)

Case 5:21-cv-01148-C Document 7 Filed 01/07/22 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE, LLC.
an Oklahoma limited liability company,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE, LLC.
an Oklahoma limited liability company,
Defendant.

Civil Action No. CIV-21-1148-C

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Best Price Auto Salvage, LLC’s (“Best Price”) Motion
for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. Defendant was served via
its registered agent and by service at its principal place of business. Although the time to
respond has passed, Defendant has neither responded or sought additional time to respond.
Accordingly, the Court accepts the well supported factual allegations in Plaintiff’s Motion.
Plaintiff is an auto salvage company in the business of salvaging, selling, and
distributing new and used parts for imported and domestic automobiles.

Plaintiff was

formed in December 2007. Plaintiff operated its business at 300 S. May Ave., Oklahoma
City, OK from January 2008 to October 2020. Since October 2020, Plaintiff has operated
its business at 1109 S. May Ave., Oklahoma City, OK. In January 2008, Plaintiff began
using in commerce the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark in relation with the
operation of its auto salvage business. Plaintiff has invested substantial time, effort, and

1

Case 5:21-cv-01148-C Document 7 Filed 01/07/22 Page 2 of 6

expense in advertising and promoting its products and services provided under the BEST
PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark throughout the State of Oklahoma and the remainder of
the United States. As a result, the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark constitutes a
valuable asset belonging solely and exclusively to Plaintiff.
On July 17, 2020, Plaintiff filed a federal trademark application in International
Classes 035 and 039 for the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE, U.S. Serial Number
90/059775. Plaintiff applied for the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE on a 1(A) actualuse base in both classes, specifying that the mark was in use in commerce at least as early
as January 1, 2008.

The BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark was registered in

International Classes 035 and 039 in the United States Patent and Trademark Office
(“USPTO”) on the Principal Register on April 13, 2021, Reg. No. 6,318,806. The BEST
PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark was registered on the principal trademark register
following a Section 2(f) claim of acquired distinctiveness submitted during prosecution of
that mark.
Defendant, Best Value Auto Salvage, LLC (“Best Value”) has been in operation
since January 2021 as a company seemingly in the automobile salvage business. In March
2021, Defendant purchased the property located at 300 S. May Ave., Oklahoma City, OK
73108, at which Plaintiff previously operated its auto salvage business. In August 2021,
Defendant adopted and began using the name BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE in
association with its operation as an automobile salvage business at the 300 S. May Ave.
location. In October 2021, Defendant discontinued use of signage bearing the BEST
VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark but resumed such use in November 2021. Defendant is
2

Case 5:21-cv-01148-C Document 7 Filed 01/07/22 Page 3 of 6

using the BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark to promote, market, and sell products
and services under the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark.
Defendant has ignored and/or disregarded Plaintiff’s prior demands, including those
contained in a letter sent July 22, 2021, that Defendant cease and desist from using the
BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark. Defendant’s use of the BEST VALUE AUTO
SALVAGE mark has already created actual confusion in the marketplace. There have been
multiple instances in which customers have intended to visit Plaintiff’s current location but
been confused and ended up at Defendant’s location. Mail addressed to Defendant has
been delivered to Plaintiff’s current location at 1109 S. May Ave.

Defendant does not

have any registered trademark associated with it.
ANALYSIS
As noted above, Plaintiff has federal rights in the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE
mark based on its federal registration and its continuous use of the BEST PRICE AUTO
SALVAGE mark in Oklahoma and throughout the United States in connection with its
automobile salvage business. Defendant’s unauthorized use of BEST VALUE AUTO
SALVAGE to promote, advertise, market, offer for sale, and/or sell their goods and
services has caused and is likely to cause confusion, mistake, and deception of the public
as to the identity and origin of Defendant’s goods and services, or as to a connection or
affiliation with Plaintiff, or permission from Plaintiff, that does not exist, causing
irreparable harm to Best Price for which there is no adequate remedy at law.
Despite actual and constructive knowledge of Plaintiff’s ownership and prior use of
the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark, Defendant has continued to use the BEST
3

Case 5:21-cv-01148-C Document 7 Filed 01/07/22 Page 4 of 6

VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark without Plaintiff’s authorization or consent, Defendant’s
actions are deliberate and willful and have been done with the intention of trading upon the
valuable goodwill built by Best Price in its BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark.
Plaintiff has no control over the quality of the goods provided by Defendant in
association with BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE. Because of the likelihood of
confusion as to the source of Defendant’s goods and services, Plaintiff’s valuable goodwill
in the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark is at the mercy of Defendant’s unauthorized
use of the confusingly similar use of BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE. Defendant’s
products and services provided in association with the BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE
mark, or at least intended to be provided in association with the same, are closely related
to, if not identical to, the products and services offered by Plaintiff in association with the
BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark. The BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark and
the BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark are highly similar in appearance, sound,
meaning and overall commercial impression. Specifically, both marks consist of the words
“best,” “auto,” and “salvage.”
Defendant has been aware, since prior to the acts complained of herein, of the
goodwill represented and symbolized by the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark and
of the public recognition and reliance upon the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark as
identifying the goods and services of Plaintiff, and as distinguishing Plaintiff’s goods and
services from those of others.

Notwithstanding such knowledge, Defendant has

intentionally and/or recklessly encroached upon the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE
mark by adopting the BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark, by the using the BEST
4

Case 5:21-cv-01148-C Document 7 Filed 01/07/22 Page 5 of 6

VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark in its advertising signage, and doing so at a location
formerly belonging to Plaintiff, with the intent to trade upon the goodwill associated with
the BEST PRICE AUTO SALVAGE mark, and to confuse and mislead the public into
believing that Defendant’s goods and services originate or emanate from or are affiliated
with Plaintiff, and/or that those goods are sponsored or approved by Plaintiff.
Defendant’s use of the BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark is likely to create
confusion in the marketplace among purchasers and prospective purchasers of Plaintiff’s
goods and services. Plaintiff has been damaged and is likely to be further damaged by
Defendant’s wrongful use of the BEST VALUE AUTO SALVAGE mark, in that the
relevant purchasing public has been and is likely to continue to be induced into purchasing
Defendant’s goods or employing Defendant’s services on the mistaken belief that those
goods and services originate or emanate from or are somehow endorsed, sponsored, or
approved by Plaintiff, which they are not. Defendant’s conduct as described herein is
causing immediate and irreparable harm and injury to Plaintiff, and to its goodwill and
reputation, and will continue to both damage Plaintiff and confuse the public. Plaintiff Price
has no adequate remedy at law. Accordingly, the Court finds Plaintiff is entitled to, among
other relief, injunctive relief in the form of a temporary restraining order.

5

Case 5:21-cv-01148-C Document 7 Filed 01/07/22 Page 6 of 6

For the reasons set forth herein, Plaintiff Best Price Auto Salvage, LLC’s Motion
for Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 4) is GRANTED. A Temporary Restraining
Order will be issued.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of January, 2022.

6