THE RITZ HOTEL, LIMITED v. SHEN MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC.

Filing 93

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THE SHEN'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. RHL'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNT III OF SHEN'S AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM IS GRANTED WITH REGARD TO RHL'S UNITED STATES TRADEMARK REGISTRATION NOS. 2,728,529 (RITZ PARIS WITH CREST DESIGN FOR FABRICS) AND 2,895,080 (RITZ PARIS FOR LINOLEUM AND WALL COVERINGS). SIGNED BY HONORABLE NORMA L. SHAPIRO ON 4/27/09. 4/27/09 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(fdc)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THE RITZ HOTEL, LTD. v. SHEN MANUFACTURING CO., INC. : : : : : ORDER AND NOW, this 27th day of April, 2009, upon consideration of defendant Shen Manufacturing Co., Inc. ("Shen")'s Motion for Reconsideration (paper no. 80) of the court's Order of March 9, 2009 (paper no. 78), together with plaintiff The Ritz Hotel, Ltd. ("RHL")'s response in opposition, it is ORDERED: 1. Shen's Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART: A. The court's prior order denying as moot RHL's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (paper no. 44) on Count III of Shen's amended counterclaim, under § 38 of the Lanham Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1120, with regard to RHL's United States trademark registration nos. 2,728,529 (RITZ PARIS with crest design for fabrics) and 2,895,080 (RITZ PARIS for linoleum and wall coverings), is VACATED. B. Shen's Motion for Reconsideration of the court's March 9, 2009 order is DENIED in all other respects. 2. RHL's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Count III of Shen's amended counterclaim is GRANTED with regard to RHL's United States trademark registration nos. 2,728,529 (RITZ PARIS with crest design for fabrics) and 2,895,080 (RITZ PARIS for linoleum and wall coverings). CIVIL ACTION 05-4730 /s/ Norma L. Shapiro J.

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?