Id. "The Legislative History of the Lanham Act points out that where a logical connection can be made between the product and the geographical term, the term is geographically descriptive" Burke-Parsons-Bowlby Corp. v. Appalachian Log Homes, Inc., 871 F.2d 590, 595 (6th Cir.1989); e.g., In re Wada, 194 F.3d 1297, 1299-1300 (Fed.Cir.1999) (affirming PTO ruling that "New York Ways Gallery" was primarily geographically descriptive because "NEW YORK is not an obscure geographical term and that it is known as a place where the goods at issue here are designed, manufactured, and sold."). 78(b); N.D. Cal. 56(e); Celotex, 477 U.S. at 324, 106 S.Ct. Inc. v. US Agency Intern. As support, Plaintiff relies on Rodeo Collection Ltd. v. W. Seventh, 812 F.2d 1215 (9th Cir.1987). STIPULATION AND ORDER: To Allow Defendant to Amend Answer, Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 5/27/09. Filing 1 MOTION for a Protective Order - filed by Yida Gao, Sand Hill Advisors PR LLC, Shima Capital Management LLC. Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 791 (9th Cir. 1. Factual findings are reviewed for clear error. Since it began using the "Sand Hill Advisors LLC" mark in 1999, Defendant has received only five or six telephone calls and received a package intended for Plaintiff. (wdblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/15/2008) Modified on 12/16/2008 (cjl, COURT STAFF). Finally, one place to get all the court documents we need. (Williams Decl. Sand Summary. Notwithstanding that finding, the Court disagrees with Defendant that Plaintiff's arguments were "frivolous." 42. 0000002341 00000 n SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiff, 0 (Entered: 01/30/2009), JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and Proposed Order, filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC., Sand Hill Advisors 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"). 6/17/2015: In re BTC Trading, Corp. and Ethan Burnside (Williams Decl. Vision Sports, Inc. v. Melville Corp., 888 F.2d 609, 615 (9th Cir. (Martin, James) (Filed on 12/11/2009) Modified on 12/14/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Sleekcraft, 599 F.2d at 352; Playboy Enters., Inc. v. Netscape Commc'ns, 354 F.3d 1020, 1026 (9th Cir.2004) ("actual confusion among significant numbers of consumers provides strong support for the likelihood of confusion[.]"). 's Mot. Ex. However, the issue was not as simple as Defendant now purports it to be. 1117(a). In Support Of Motion To Compel Arbitration; As To Parties: removed. Save 25% on a pre-paid one year subscription. (Opp'n at 22-23.) (Date Filed: 2/18/2009). 1997). [3] Plaintiff's assertion that "Sand Hill Advisors" is suggestive also is at odds with Mr. Conway's acknowledgment the founders selected such name because it was "a more generic title." 2004) ("Is the mark the name of the place or region from which the goods actually come? Struck (Defendant); As to: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); Shima Capitol LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant) et al. *1112 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247-48, 106 S.Ct. (Court Reporter: Not Reported) (jlsec, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/13/2010) Modified on 1/15/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, 7/8/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF ADAM B. xref "Marks are often classified in categories of generally increasing distinctiveness; . (Davidson Decl. 0000001201 00000 n Factual disputes are genuine if they "properly can be resolved in favor of either party." On November 4, 2008, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court, alleging a single claim for service mark infringement under the Lanham Act. At the other end of the spectrum are generic marks, which are not protected. Art Attacks Ink, LLC v. MGA Entm't Inc., 581 F.3d 1138, 1145 (9th Cir. See Grupo Gigante SA De CV v. Dallo & Co., Inc., 391 F.3d 1088, 1102 (9th Cir.2004) ("Descriptive or suggestive marks are relatively weak."). These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia. % Sand Hill Global Advisors Review As such, other advisory companies are more likely to refer to "Sand Hill" and "Advisors" in describing or advertising their services. (Hill Decl. ORDER: That any oppositions shall be filed no later than 07/09/10; any reply shall be filed by 07/16/10. Lahoti, 586 F.3d at 1197. 2753. (af, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/25/2009) (Entered: 02/25/2009), ORDER RE DISCOVERY PROCEDURES - Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte, on 2/24/09. Thus, despite Defendant's protestations the contrary, Mr. Conway's deposition testimony does not show that Plaintiff "knew" that it lacked a protectable mark. A, McCaffrey Depo. at 8-9. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James on 6/1/2010. Boston Private said it would pay 70% of the purchase price in cash and the rest in stock. at 24:1-12 ("at the time we were located on Sand Hill Road. Brenda Vingiello 47 0 obj<>stream 7@t020B bNq E *** Declaration of Rachel R. Davidson in Support of 47 Reply Memorandum filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. 1117(a). 2002).[1]. J. at 16, Dkt. L.R. Here, there is no dispute that Sand Hill can be construed to mean that Plaintiff is an advisory firm based in the Sand Hill areaand indeed, that name was selected by Plaintiff because they, in fact, were then located on Sand Hill Road. IAPD - Investment Adviser Public Disclosure - Homepage M2 Software, Inc. v. Madacy, 421 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir.2005). 0 Evidence that use of a mark or name has already caused actual confusion as to the source of a product or service is "persuasive proof that future confusion is *1121 likely." Messrs. Sandell and Hill filed their Limited Liability Company Articles of Organization with the California Secretary of State on April 27, 1999. Given that Plaintiff and Defendant used the same mark in the same general geographical area, Plaintiff's position that the parties' simultaneous use of the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark was likely to cause confusion was certainly arguable. 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. (Opp'n at 19.) The next factor concerns the proximity or relatedness of the good or services represented by the potentially infringing mark. 84. Service marks and trademarks are governed by identical standards." Chance v. Pac-Tel Teletrac Inc., 242 F.3d 1151, 1156 (9th Cir.2001). C at 80:1-82:9, Dkt. In re Supply Guys, Inc., 86 U.S.P.Q.2d 1488, 1495 (T.T.A.B.2008) involved an appeal from the denial of a trademark registration, while Modular Cinemas of America, Inc. v. Mini Cinemas Corp., 348 F.Supp. 3.) Sciences Corp., 511 F.3d at 973. 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. Plaintiff admittedly has no expert survey to support its claim of secondary meaning, but instead, relies entirely on evidence that it used the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark in its marketing and advertising efforts. San Francisco-based First Republic was undone by low-rate mortgages it made to its wealthy customers as well as by the fallout from last month's banking crisis. 10. However, the cited deposition excerpts of Gary Conway, one of Plaintiff's founders, do not support Defendant's argument. However, evidence of secondary meaning must be established as of the time that the alleged infringer began using the mark in dispute. endstream endobj 34 0 obj<> endobj 35 0 obj<> endobj 36 0 obj<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]/ExtGState<>>> endobj 37 0 obj<> endobj 38 0 obj<> endobj 39 0 obj[/ICCBased 46 0 R] endobj 40 0 obj<> endobj 41 0 obj<> endobj 42 0 obj<> endobj 43 0 obj<>stream Brookfield, 174 F.3d at 1055. The `need test' focuses on the extent to which a mark is actually needed by competitors to identify their goods or services." WebSAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a California limited liability company, Dkt. ), Defendant's business focuses on purchasing, holding, selling, managing and leasing commercial real estate in the San Francisco Bay Area solely for its own investment purposes. The Court found that Instant Media's mark was "conceptually weak because the I'M mark exists in a crowded field of trademarks using variations of `IM,' `I'm' and `I am.'" 1983) (holding that the fact that plaintiff and defendant's respective products were used in the medical or health care field was insufficient to show that the goods were sufficiently similar to cause a likelihood of confusion). Home | Sand Hill Global Advisors (Entered: 12/11/2009), Declaration of Jane Williams in Support of 42 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Applied Info Sciences Corp., 511 F.3d at 969-970. Ex. In a trademark infringement action, Plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the defendant use of the same or similar mark is likely to cause confusion based upon consideration of the factors set forth in AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341, 448-49 (9th Cir. 's Opp'n to Def. Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions. (Davidson Decl. The parties are presently before the Court on Defendant's motion for de novo determination of Magistrate Judge Maria Elena James' report and recommendation to deny Defendant's motion for attorneys' fees. Here, Plaintiff asserts that the presumption applies here 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. "If the evidence is merely colorable, or is not significantly probative, summary judgment may be granted." (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2010) Modified on 1/27/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). CV-08-5016-SBA ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC'S STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED This contention lacks merit. And the best part of all, documents in their CrowdSourced Library are FREE! 2753. 0000004889 00000 n The matter has been fully briefed, and is now ripe for determination. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Non-Government Works Copyright 2001-2023 Think Computer Corporation. Id. UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy. See Order of Reference, Dkt. "Sand Hill" refers to a geographical locale where Plaintiff operates its business. "); see also McCaffrey Depo. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Declaration of James P. Martin, # 2 Appendix Proposed Order)(Martin, James) (Filed on 12/2/2009) Modified on 12/3/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 2.) STIPULATION AND ORDER re Pretrial Schedule. BOSTON - Boston Private Financial Holdings Inc. said Monday that it had agreed to acquire Sand Hill Advisors Inc., an investment advisory firm in Menlo Park, Calif., for about $16 million (Hill Decl. 's Mot. 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. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 11/19/09. Applied Info. A claim is unreasonable or groundless for purposes of a permissible award of fees only if it is frivolous and fails to raise colorable or debatable issues. At Sand Hill, we have long-standing experience with RSUs, deferred compensation, and specialized tax trailer Why is this public record being published online? (McCaffrey Depo. Plaintiff attempts to analogize this case to Rodeo Collection, and argues that "Sand Hill Advisors" is suggestive, and not primarily geographically descriptive as claimed by Defendant. 's Mot. (Entered: 02/26/2009), ADR Clerks Notice Appointing James Gilliland as Mediator. This factor is not centered on a prospective customer or client's purchase decision, but rather, whether he or she is sufficiently sophisticated to discern the difference between the parties, notwithstanding their use of an identical or confusingly similar mark. In fact, Plaintiff readily acknowledges that Defendant places its banners on buildings while Plaintiff uses them at sponsored events. 07:04. 0000013022 00000 n However, descriptive marks may acquire distinctiveness through use in commerce. Sand Hill Advisors LLC: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re {{61}} MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC Objections to R&R due by 6/15/2010. Rodeo Collection, 812 F.2d at 1218. Aug. 13, 2007). 1:23-MC-00086 | 2023-02-15, California Courts Of Appeal | Other | 636(b)(1); see Fed.R.Civ.P 72(b). In particular, she concluded that Plaintiff had presented plausible grounds for its lawsuit and otherwise rejected Defendant's contention that this was an "exceptional" case warranting a fee award under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 7-1(b). Defendant next argues that Plaintiff lacked any objective basis upon which to claim that SAND HILL ADVISORS is a suggestive mark entitled to protection under the Lanham Act. . Continue reading Be the first to find this review helpful 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. WebIAPD provides information on Investment Adviser firms regulated by the SEC and/or state securities regulators. 64. 92, Filing Here, there is no dispute that "Sand Hill" refers to a geographical locale *1114 on or near Sand Hill Road in the Silicon Valley and that Plaintiff, in fact, chose "Sand Hill" because of its geographical significance. The record confirms that within five years of Plaintiff alleged date of first use, Defendant used the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark on its letterhead, and transacted business and publicized itself in newspapers and other media under that name. On January 26, 2010, the Court issued its Order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant.1 See Order Granting Def. Id. 0000001331 00000 n DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk, U.S. District Courts | Other | In general, the same analytical framework applies to infringement claims, irrespective of whether the marks or names are registered with the PTO. (Id. 0000000940 00000 n YIDA GAO, ET AL. All but one of the Sleekcraft factors strongly favor Defendant, and none favor Plaintiff. Sand Hill, which caters primarily to high-net-worth individuals in Northern California, has $900 million of assets under management. In addition, the widespread use of "Sand Hill" by other businesses further weakens the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark. 2505 (internal citations omitted). (Williams Depo. Viewing the record in a light most favorable to Plaintiff, the Court finds that no reasonable jury could find that the parties' common use of the "Sand Hill Mark" is sufficient to create a likelihood of confusion. (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. THE KUHN FOUNDATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on Plaintiff first argues that it is entitled to a presumption of secondary meaning under section 2(f) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. at 23:3-15; Williams Decl. Art Attacks Ink, LLC, 581 F.3d at 1146 (affirming summary judgment for alleged infringer where plaintiff failed to produce any evidence to demonstrate that its advertising was effective). 2023-02-21, Los Angeles County Superior Courts | Contract | 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. at 51:6-52:14; Williams Decl. (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 2/3/2009) Modified on 2/4/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). J. at 16-17, Dkt. BOSTON - Boston Private Financial Holdings Inc. said Monday that it had agreed to acquire Sand Hill Advisors Inc., an investment advisory firm in Menlo Park, SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a California limited liability company, Dkt. Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. This is particularly true where the good or service is expensive. 1052(f) (emphasis added). The firm is the successor-in-interest to CLW Financial Services, Inc., a company founded in 1982 by Jane Williams, Gary Conway and Joseph Luongo. Eaton, Ingham, Hillsdale counties accused of illegally profiting Sand Hill Advisors, LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors, LLC F at 2.) Plaintiff argues that both parties: (1) operate websites to describe their services; (2) utilize promotional brochures; (3) rely on "word of mouth" referrals; (4) attend networking events; and (5) promote their marks on banners. at 1218. at 207:11-19.) (Opp'n at 16.). (Entered: 02/19/2009), CLERKS NOTICE Case Management Conference set for 2/18/2009 02:45 PM. The lack of overlap is underscored by the paucity of evidence of actual confusion, which consists of nothing more than a few misplaced calls and a misdelivered package over the course of the last ten years. 26, US District Court for the Northern District of California, 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act). Plaintiff concedes as much, but argues such sophistication is irrelevant on the ground that its clients would not retain Plaintiff if they believed that it was focused on real estate management.
Hive Truncate Table Partition,
Who Dies In The Red Wedding,
Katy Degroot Maiden Name,
Stephen Gould Hopkins,
Celtic Deity Tarot Correspondence,
Articles S