Ex. (E.g., Williams Decl. Def. K.) Where the market is inundated by products using the particular trademarked word, there is a corresponding likelihood that consumers "will not likely be confused by any two in the crowd." 6/17/2015: In re BTC Trading, Corp. and Ethan Burnside The marks here are identical, which, at first blush, appears to favor Plaintiff. 3-5 d), filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC, Sand Hill Advisors LLC. (Entered: 01/21/2010), Minute Entry: Settlement Conference held on 1/13/10 before Magistrate Judge James Larson. Ex. The court has the discretion under Lanham Act to award attorneys' fees to a prevailing party in "exceptional cases." UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy. 2009). In its motion, Defendant contends that Plaintiff cannot demonstrate that "Sand Hill Advisors" is a protectable mark or that Defendant's use of the mark is likely to confuse the public. Gary Conway testified at his deposition that the founders selected the "Sand Hill" name because the firm's offices were located on Sand Hill Road and they wanted to "trumpet" their location due to its "cache." Cancellation and Refund Policy, Privacy Policy, and 's Opp'n to Def. at 8-9. STRUCK IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, 7/8/2021: Memorandum of Points & Authorities, 7/21/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF DENIS SHMIDT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS AND CROSS-DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT ADAM B. Although it is clear from a plain reading of 2(f) that it does not apply to unregistered marks, Defendant did not specifically make such an argument. at 22.) Shortly thereafter on November 17, 2008, Plaintiff sought to register "Sand Hill Advisors" as a service mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO"). Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions. The top five bank holding companies have combined total consumer loan portfolios of more than $1.8 trillion as of December 31, 2022. Thus, in a federal infringement action, the holder of the registered mark may rely on section 2(f) to show acquired distinctiveness (i.e., secondary meaning) as of the date of registration. Cir.2009). Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. Factual findings are reviewed for clear error. (Entered: 12/11/2009), Declaration of Katherine R. Miller in Support of 42 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. xref ***Civil Case Terminated. REFER TO DOCUMENT 50 . q Filing 1 MOTION for a Protective Order - filed by Yida Gao, Sand Hill Advisors PR LLC, Shima Capital Management LLC. Co., 704 F.2d 1575, 1577 (Fed.Cir.1983) (common use of "DRC" mark not likely to cause confusion where products were "quite distinct"). (Id. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2009) Modified on 11/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Founded Date Jan 1, 1982. Sleekcraft, 599 F.2d at 354. 2.) Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION), Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information, Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE RE: ARBITRATION), Declaration - DECLARATION OF FRANK D. RORIE JR. Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Such services include investment planning, retirement and estate planning and philanthropic strategies. This change was prompted by the decision of certain members of Plaintiff's management to reacquire equity from Boston Financial. 3.) Complaint; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. Since around 1995, Plaintiff has provided a variety of financial and advisory services to its "high net-worth" clients to assist them in the investment and management of their assets. (Davidson's Reply Decl. Here, Plaintiff has adduced no evidence to show that its advertising and marketing efforts were effective. Plaintiff's ancillary contention that "Sand Hill Advisors" satisfies the "need test" fares no better. Cons Only location is in downtown Palo Alto, not in the hub of the city or on the legendary Sand Hill Road. 's Mot. 08/29/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department R at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Status Conference, Updated -- Denis Shmidt (Attorney): Organization Name changed from Orsus Gate LLP to HARDER STONEROCK LLP, Notice of Change of Firm Name; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); Shima Capitol Management LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant); Shima Capitol GP LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant); New Firm Name: HARDER STONEROCK LLP, Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by: Amnon Siegel (Attorney), Address for Amnon Siegel (Attorney) updated. (Entered: 02/26/2009), ADR Clerks Notice Appointing James Gilliland as Mediator. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. at 66:1-3.) As for the issue of whether Plaintiff could establish the requisite five years of continuous and exclusive use, the Court finds that Defendant raised a colorable argument in support of such a claim. 9.) This argument is based on nothing but sheer speculation, which is not evidence. 2:23-MC-00075 | 2023-02-15, U.S. District Courts | Other | (Opp'n at 25.) (Entered: 02/19/2009), CLERKS NOTICE Case Management Conference set for 2/18/2009 02:45 PM. Intern. 0 (Court Reporter: Not Reported) (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 2/18/2009) Modified on 2/20/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). All Rights Reserved. for Attorneys' Fees ("R&R"), Dkt. Jury Trial set for 2/22/2010 08:30 AM. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Dhillon, Jas) (Filed on 6/1/2009) (Entered: 06/01/2009), STIPULATION AND ORDER: To Allow Defendant to Amend Answer, Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 5/27/09. Id. HWn:SjA-**KiH:u@rR5gEIVzv/6"?3ofJy'}J"Hz?pO2>NOklkI-'[cB9P0o '/{'{np"&}x\A0y68l\z?|. Where, as here, the mark is not registered, a plaintiff must establish that its mark either is inherently distinctive, or has acquired distinctiveness through secondary meaning. Ex. at 1219. The messaging organization is providing a sandbox for developers to enable cross-border transactions for central bank digital currencies, an elusive goal as most central banks focus on domestic use. WebIAPD provides information on Investment Adviser firms regulated by the SEC and/or state securities regulators. Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC. at 12, Dkt. *1112 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247-48, 106 S.Ct. 1502(e)(2). AMENDED ORDER re 91 Order, Terminate Motions,,,,,,. Id. See MSJ Order at 11-12, Dkt. at 250, 106 S.Ct. While both parties operate websites, Plaintiff has admitted that no one viewing Defendant's website would confuse it with Plaintiff's site. at 111:25-112:11 149:3-151:7.) 0000001069 00000 n Finally, Defendant argues that Plaintiff's likelihood of confusion claim was "frivolous." Nor is it disputed that Plaintiff does not engage in the sale, purchase or lease of any commercial properties. The most favorable inference that may be drawn from the record regarding the similarities in the parties' services is that both, in a broad sense, have some connection to "real estate." 04:53. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 1/26/10. As to the imagination test, the court explained that "[a] person would not be likely to picture a shopping center upon first hearing the name `Rodeo Collection'" and that "some imagination" was necessary to associate the word "collection" with the collection of shops and restaurants that make up the shopping centers. Defendant also asserts that Plaintiff lacked evidence to support its alternative claim that even if SAND HILL ADVISORS were descriptive, such mark had gained secondary meaning. Company Type For Profit. In opposing Defendant's summary judgment motion, Plaintiff argued that the presumption applied because it allegedly has been using the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark exclusively and continuously since March 29, 1995, and that Defendant did not begin using the mark until 2005, which more than five years after Plaintiff's date of first use. (Conway Depo. Pretrial Conference set for 2/16/2010 01:00 PM.. (Martin, James) (Filed on 12/11/2009) Modified on 12/14/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 62-3. 1052(f) (emphasis added). (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2010) Modified on 2/18/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 26, US District Court for the Northern District of California, 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act). 2753. Prods., Inc. v. Beckman Instruments, Inc., 718 F.2d 1201, 1206 (1st Cir. 636(b)(1)(B), (C); Fed.R.Civ.P. Id. She testified that such mark was chosen because of its geographical reference, since they worked and lived in that area, and were active in the community. 31 0 obj<>stream at 23:3-15; Williams Decl. See Davidson Decl. 15-20, Dkt. (Hill Depo. ), Since its founding in 1982, Plaintiff has undergone a number of name changes. Assuming without deciding that Plaintiff's date of first use was March 25, 1995, Defendant has presented uncontroverted evidence demonstrating that it used the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark within five years of that date. On February 9, 2010, Defendant filed a motion for attorneys' fees, which was referred to Magistrate Judge James ("the Magistrate"). Fed.R.Civ.P 72(b)(1); see Holder v. Holder, 392 F.3d 1009, 1022 (9th Cir. Sand Hill Advisors LLC: Defendant: Sand Hill Advisors LLC: Case Number: 4:2008cv05016: Filed: November 4, 2008: Court: US District Court for the Northern District 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). On January 12, 2010, the parties appeared through counsel for oral argument on the motion. (Entered: 01/29/2009), ADR Clerks Notice Setting ADR Phone Conference on 2/10/09 at 11:00 a.m. 2008). Accordingly, a genuine issue for trial exists if the non-movant presents evidence from which a reasonable jury, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to that party, could resolve the material issue in his or her favor. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/5/2009) Modified on 1/6/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Def. In June 2015, the SEC filed a settled administrative action against 2 entrepreneurs who offered and sold security-based swaps through a website called Sand Hill exchange and sought people to fund accounts at Sand Hill using dollars or bitcoins. 78(b); N.D. Cal. WebPlaintiff, Sand Hill Advisors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, filed the instant service mark infringement action under the Lanham Act seeking to prevent Defendant, (mejlc1, COURT STAFF) Modified on 6/2/2010. (Opp'n at 14.) (Id.). For these reasons, Plaintiff's Objections to Defendant's Evidence Offered in Support of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket 45) are denied as moot. Id. Nearly two years after its last loan, the Paycheck Protection Program is still making headlines for all the wrong reasons, unfortunately. xb```f``Zuxb 1}rx@Rl3g3%WvU3_eXM?dKn ti edPF ) X& b`l y6%I*'.&h,(a`H31Hu@ 2d Plaintiff attempted to register its new name with the California Secretary of State, but was informed that Defendant had previously registered the name with the State in 1999. Defendant contends that Plaintiff filed this lawsuit in bad faith, ostensibly because it pursued the action knowing that it had no protectable mark. Two Pesos, 505 U.S. at 769, 112 S.Ct. The Court is persuaded by the record presented that any overlap in the parties' marketing channels is nil or minimal, which weighs in favor of Defendant. 1989); Grupo Gigante SA De CV v. Dallo & Co., Inc., 391 F.3d 1088, 1107 n. 1 (9th Cir.2004). The greater the similarity between the two marks at issue, the greater the likelihood of confusion. STIPULATION AND ORDER: To Allow Defendant to Amend Answer, Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 5/27/09. Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk. (Opp'n at 22-23.) Years later, certain members of Plaintiff's management sought to reacquire their equity stake from Boston Private, which prompted Plaintiff to reorganize as a Delaware limited liability company. WebSAND HILL GLOBAL ADVISORS, LLC ( CRD # 111295/SEC#:801-58002 ) SAND HILL ADVISORS, INC., SAND HILL GLOBAL ADVISORS, LLC, SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC., SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC. 1989). "Exceptional circumstances can be found when the non-prevailing party's case is groundless, unreasonable, vexatious, or pursued in bad faith." (Martin, James) (Filed on 1/21/2010) Modified on 1/22/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 0000012780 00000 n Defendant argues that Plaintiff lacked a reasonable basis for claiming that SAND HILL ADVISORS was suggestive or had acquired secondary meaning. at 212:7-10. Id. The Court of Appeal had rejected Sand Hill's claims against Wells Fargo related to a 2011 lawsuit, which alleged a foreclosure auction of the center was not properly held. Broadly speaking, suggestive, arbitrary and fanciful marks are entitled to protection, whereas a descriptive mark is not unless it has acquired distinctiveness through secondary meaning. Only admissible evidence may be considered in ruling on a motion for motion for summary judgment. No one has written a summary of this case yet. Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions. In June 1982, CLW Financial Services, Inc., became known as Conway, Luongo, Williams, Inc. (Id.
Gavin Rubinstein Wife,
Does Billy Fuccillo Have Cancer,
What Nationality Were Bilhah And Zilpah,
What Is Bill Bellis Doing Now,
2026 Basketball Rankings Florida,
Articles S