AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P. v. OPINION CORP.

Filing 16

MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT DEFT'S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS I, II, III, IV, AND VII IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. DEFT'S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS IV, V, AND VI PURSUANT TO 47:230 IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE RONALD L. BUCKWALTER ON 6/19/2012; 6/19/2012 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(tomg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P.,
Plaintiff,
v.
OPINION CORP. d/b/a
PISSEDCONSUMER.COM,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 12-713

ORDER
AND NOW, this 19th day of June, 2012, upon consideration of Defendant Opinion Corp. d/b/a
PissedConsumer.com’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 5), Plaintiff Amerigas Propane, L.P.’s Response in
Opposition (Docket No. 7), and Defendant’s Reply Brief (Docket No. 8), it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1.

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Counts I, II, III, IV, and VII is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART as follows:
a.

b.

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that its nominative use of Plaintiff’s
trademark is fair is DENIED;

c.

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that the Complaint fails to allege
likelihood of confusion is DENIED;

d.

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that the doctrine of initial interest
confusion does not apply is DENIED;

e.

2.

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that Plaintiff fails to allege the use of
“AMERIGAS” as a trademark is DENIED;

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss any claim premised on a theory of contributory
infringement is GRANTED, and Plaintiff is precluded from seeking to hold
Defendant contributorily liable for the claims made in Counts I, II, III, IV, and VII;

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Counts IV, V, and VI pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 230 is
DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

S/ Ronald L. Buckwalter
RONALD L. BUCKWALTER, S.J.