sand hill advisors lawsuit

[1] Plaintiff objects to the declaration of Albert Hill on the ground that he did not sign it under penalty of perjury. 0000010111 00000 n 0000005085 00000 n 2021-11-08. There's always a lot to do, and even more to learn. Plaintiff also has made no showing that Plaintiff and Defendant attend the same networking events or that their "word-of-mouth" referrals involve the same demographic. (Id. 0000004984 00000 n 9; McCaffrey Depo. (Hill Decl. 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. Brenda Vingiello (Id. The central bank's instant payment system could bring enormous benefits to banks and their customers. for Summ. We lived in that area. Having reviewed the motion papers submitted and considered *1110 the arguments of counsel in connection with this matter, the Court GRANTS the motion for the reasons set forth below. % (Opp'n at 19.) Id. 1995). Oct. 10, 2008) ("prevailing on the merits alone does not create a presumption that the suit was vexatious or in bad faith"). 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. F at 2.) Plaintiff is a wealth management firm that provides advice to its wealthy clients to assist them in the management of their assets; to that end, provides advice on investment planning, retirement and estate planning and philanthropic strategies. 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. The Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. 56(e); Orr v. Bank of Am., 285 F.3d 764, 773 (9th Cir. 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[.]"). Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. In re Sand Hill Exchange, et al. Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes summary judgment if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 72(b)(1); Civ. In sum, the undisputed evidence establishes that Defendant was using the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark within five years of Plaintiff claimed dated of first use. PLEASE SEE DOCKET # 51 . Notice of Settlement Conference and Settlement Conference Order for 1/13/2010 02:00 PM in Courtroom F, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Ex. 13.) ), As a result of Plaintiff's inability to register the name "Sand Hill Advisors LLC" with the California Secretary of State, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court on November 4, 2008, alleging a single claim for service mark infringement under the Lanham Act. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. at 23:3-15; Williams Decl. Plaintiff summarily asserts that "there is no need for other wealth management firms to use `Sand Hill Advisors' in describing or advertising their services." Brenda received a B. (Entered: 01/30/2009), JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and Proposed Order, filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC., Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC [2] "[T]he only difference between a trademark and a service mark is that a trademark identifies goods while a service mark identifies services. Inc., 287 F.3d 866, 871 (9th Cir.2002) (use of "Japan" in "Japan Telecom, Inc." did not "automatically make the trade name geographically descriptive"); Forschner Group, 30 F.3d at 355 ("That a phrase or term evokes geographic associations does not, standing alone, support a finding of geographic descriptiveness."). Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. (mejlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2010) Modified on 3/2/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Seattle Trademark Lawyer NOTICE OF REFERENCE AND ORDER SCHEDULING HEARING: Hearing set for 04/08/2010 at 10:00 AM, re 61 Motion for Attorney Fees. Def. WebCase No. Aug. 13, 2007). Defendant argues that Plaintiff lacked a reasonable basis for claiming that SAND HILL ADVISORS was suggestive or had acquired secondary meaning. (McCaffrey Depo. Stephen W. Boney, Inc. v. Boney Servs., Inc., 127 F.3d 821, 827 (9th Cir. 0000002831 00000 n (Opp'n at 22.) of Court Order Continuing CMC; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. Defendant does not provide any services to the public and has never provided any financial, investment or any other advice to any third party. Please take note that plaintiff's counsel initiates the call to all parties. Despite Defendant's intimation to the contrary, the Court did not conclude that a mark is weakened by common use of terms comprising the mark only where the marks are identical. On November 4, 2008, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court, alleging a single claim for service mark infringement under the Lanham Act. ), In 2000, Plaintiff changed its state of incorporation from California to Delaware, for reasons which were related to the acquisition of Plaintiff by Boston Private Financial Holdings ("Boston Private"). L.R. Though Plaintiff was unsuccessful in pressing this point, the Court notes that Plaintiff's argument was not frivolous.2. Ex. 84. "Some factors are much more helpful than others, and the relative importance of each individual factor will be case specific. [I]t is often possible to reach a conclusion with respect to likelihood of confusion after considering only a subset of the factors." All but one of the Sleekcraft factors strongly favor Defendant, and none favor Plaintiff. 2009). 69, Filing 10; Davidson Decl. The Court has concluded above that "Sand Hill Advisors" is primarily geographically descriptive, which supports the conclusion that the mark is weak. 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. Thus, the Court concludes that "Sand Hill Advisors" is primarily geographically descriptive. For reprint and licensing requests for this article, Swift works to bridge 'digital islands' of CBDCs, 20 bank holding companies with the largest consumer loan portfolios, Bank runs, fraud and faster payments: FedNow's impact on regulation, JPMorgan Chase, FDIC put an end to First Republic's slow bleed, Conflating issues or missing the point? ORDER: That any oppositions shall be filed no later than 07/09/10; any reply shall be filed by 07/16/10. Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. 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 Bank groups say the focus on capital rules in Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michael Barr's report on Silicon Valley Bank are misguided. In addition, Defendant asserts that the only reason Plaintiff commenced this action was to obtain the right to register its mark with the California Secretary of State. (Entered: 01/21/2010), Minute Entry: Settlement Conference held on 1/13/10 before Magistrate Judge James Larson. Whether a mark has acquired secondary meaning generally presents a question of fact. "Not surprisingly, under this standard, defendants are `rarely' awarded attorney fees in trademark infringement cases." (Entered: 01/29/2009), ADR Clerks Notice Setting ADR Phone Conference on 2/10/09 at 11:00 a.m. 578, 581-82 (S.D.N.Y.1972) addressed the issue of "use" to determine which party could establish priority to claim ownership of the mark. (Entered: 12/22/2009), Proposed Order re 36 Motion for Summary Judgment by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. See Davidson Decl. WebSAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiff, vs. (Entered: 12/11/2009), Memorandum in Opposition re 36 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. See Japan Telecom, Inc. v. Japan Telecom Am. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2009) Modified on 2/25/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). The record unequivocally establishes that Plaintiff and Defendant's respective businesses share little, if anything, in common. The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download: Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. (Williams Depo. On November 19, 2009, Defendant filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment. Classic Media, Inc. v. Mewborn, 532 F.3d 978, 990 (9th Cir. Notwithstanding that finding, the Court disagrees with Defendant that Plaintiff's arguments were "frivolous." at 132:12-133:8; Conway Depo. Of Grand View, 84 Video/newsstand, Inc. v. Thomas Sartini. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court took the matter under submission. As a result of Plaintiff's inability to register the name "Sand Hill Advisors LLC" with the California Secretary of State, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court on Two Pesos, 505 U.S. at 769, 112 S.Ct. 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. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James on 6/1/2010. And the best part of all, documents in their CrowdSourced Library are FREE! Because "Sand Hill Advisors" is descriptive, it is not entitled to protection unless it has acquired secondary meaning. Stated simply, it is not. for Attorneys' Fees ("R&R"), Dkt. VIA TELEPHONE. 10 0 obj <> endobj 2023-02-21, Los Angeles County Superior Courts | Contract | Sand Hill SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC v. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC Filing 92 AMENDED ORDER re 91 Order, Terminate Motions,,,,,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H PART 1, # 9 Exhibit H PART 2, # 10 Exhibit H PART 3, # 11 Exhibit I, # 12 Exhibit J, # 13 Exhibit K, # 14 Exhibit L, # 15 Exhibit M, # 16 Exhibit N, # 17 Exhibit O, # 18 Exhibit P, # 19 Exhibit Q, # 20 Exhibit R, # 21 Exhibit S, # 22 Exhibit T, # 23 Exhibit U, # 24 Exhibit V)(Related document(s) 42 ) (Martin, James) (Filed on 12/11/2009) Modified on 12/14/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 64. 41, Filing %%EOF (Entered: 12/23/2009), RESPONSE to re 45 Objection to Evidence filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. The matter has been fully briefed, and is now ripe for determination. 3-5 b) of discussion of ADR options, filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 1/28/2009) Modified on 1/29/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Cancellation and Refund Policy, Privacy Policy, and Forschner, 30 F.3d at 355 (emphasis added). 2002).[1]. The Fiduciary Network-affiliated firm revealed on Wednesday that it had accessed the funds through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). In June 1982, CLW Financial Services, Inc., became known as Conway, Luongo, Williams, Inc. (Id. at 13-18. (Opp'n at 14.) 636(b)(1). First Republic Bank was shuttered by regulators early Monday, and all its deposits and most of its assets were acquired by JPMorgan. at 50:10-52:14.) Sand Hill (Opp'n at 14.) 636(b)(1)(B), (C); Fed.R.Civ.P. (tjs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2009) (Entered: 01/29/2009), NOTICE of need for ADR Phone Conference (ADR L.R. 0000005191 00000 n (Id. In view of the dearth of evidence of actual confusion, the Court finds that this factor weighs in favor of Defendant. Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions. Even if section 2(f) were applicable, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite five years of exclusive and continuous use. As noted, a descriptive mark cannot be registered with the PTO absent a showing of secondary meaning. Not true. If you do not agree with these terms, then do not use our website and/or services. Summons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Adam B. Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC at 131:9-10; Davidson Decl. In or about 2000, Boston Private Financial Holdings ("Boston Private") acquired a financial interest in Plaintiff. Sand Hill Advisors, LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors, LLC :: California 26, US District Court for the Northern District of California, 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act). Civil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. 0000001003 00000 n Service marks and trademarks are governed by identical standards." Chance v. Pac-Tel Teletrac Inc., 242 F.3d 1151, 1156 (9th Cir.2001). Id. As such, Defendant is hard pressed to criticize Plaintiff for making an erroneous argument when Plaintiff itself failed to recognize that error in its papers. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2010) Modified on 6/25/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 2/3/2009) Modified on 2/4/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Answer; Filed by: Adam B. 47 0 obj<>stream 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. IAPD - Investment Adviser Public Disclosure - Homepage Struck (Defendant); As to: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); Shima Capitol LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant) et al. Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. (Hill Decl. 92, Filing 85. Def. See Brookfield Commc'ns, 174 F.3d at 1056 (likelihood of confusion resulting from the use of the same or similar mark was "remote" if the parties "did not compete" with one another); Dynamics Research Corp. v. Langenau Mfg. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a California limited liability company, Dkt. "Marks are often classified in categories of generally increasing distinctiveness; . *1122 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket 36) is GRANTED. 0000002341 00000 n (Davidson Decl. If the PTO approves the registration under section 2(f), the presumption of validity conferred by the registration also "includes a presumption that the registered mark has acquired distinctiveness[.]" LANSING, Mich. (WILX) - About half of Michigans counties, including Ingham, Eaton and Hillsdale, have been named in a class-action lawsuit over profits from the sale 7@t020B bNq E 2.) But, advertising, standing alone, does not establish secondary meaning. Two Pesos, 505 U.S. at 769, 112 S.Ct. Eaton, Ingham, Hillsdale counties accused of illegally profiting Other business, many of which are located in the Silicon Valley (which encompasses the Sand Hill *1119 area), include "Sand Hill Angels," "Sand Hill Financial," "Sand Hill Finance," "Sand Hill Capital," "Sand Hill Econometrics," "Sand Hill Equity Research," "Sand Hill Partners," "Sand Hill Consulting Associates," and "Sand Hill Group LLC." Ex. (Related document(s) 48 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/23/2009) Modified on 12/28/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 15-20, Dkt. Jim Iuorio: The Fed will probably be dovish for a little longer. at 89:9-12.) In Brief: Boston Private to Buy Calif. Advisory Firm 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.'" 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. 1. Id. E, F, H, K, L; Williams Depo. The court has the discretion under Lanham Act to award attorneys' fees to a prevailing party in "exceptional cases." "However, such a broad inference is not sufficient to demonstrate that a genuine issue exists concerning likelihood of confusion as to the source of the products involved in the present suit." Sand Hill Advisors 31 0 obj<>stream 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. 0000002447 00000 n (Miller Decl. 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. at 1218-19. Feb 28, 2023 CNBC Halftime Report: Rising Interest Rates on Valuation Multiples | February 10, 2023 0000013022 00000 n Banks react to Fed report. This contention lacks merit. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2009) Modified on 11/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). (edllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/26/2009) Modified on 2/27/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. As an initial matter, Defendant argues that since Plaintiff's founders acknowledged choosing SAND HILL ADVISORS because of its geographical significance, i.e., the company's then new location on Sand Hill Road in the heart of the Silicon Valley, Plaintiff was foreclosed from arguing that the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark was anything other than descriptive. See Lahoti v. VeriCheck, Inc., 586 F.3d 1190, 1197 (9th Cir. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Stipulation to Amend Answer and Affirmative Defenses)(Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 5/21/2009) Modified on 5/22/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF).
Ano Ang Melodic Contour Sa Musika, Are Jacaranda Trees Poisonous To Cattle, Charlie Schlatter Leukemia, Balance Of Nature Commercial Actors, Articles S