Brian Lichtenberg v. Alex & Chloe - TRO Order

7/27/2019 Brian Lichtenberg v. Alex & Chloe - TRO Order

1/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

O

UNI TED STATES DI STRI CT COURT

CENTRAL DI STRI CT OF CALI FORNI A

BRI AN LI CHTENBERG, LLC, aCal i f orni a l i mi ted l i abi l i t ycompany; BRI AN LI CHTENBERG,an i ndi vi dual ,

Pl ai nt i f f ,

v.

ALEX & CHLOE, I NC. , aCal i f or ni a cor por at i on;CHRI STOPHER WALTER

LI CHTENBERG, an i ndi vi dual ;MARKED SHOWROOM, LLC, aCal i f ornai l i mi ted l i abi l i t ycompany; J ACQUELI NE YI , ani ndi vi dual ; TU TRAN, ani ndi vi dual KYLE MOCKETT, ani ndi vi dual ; KAYTEE ENRI GHT,an i ndi vi dual ,

Def endant s.___________________________

))))))))))))

)))))))))))

Case No. CV 13- 06837 DDP ( PJ Wx)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARYRESTRAINING ORDER

[ Dkt . No. 19]

Pr esent l y bef or e t he cour t i s Pl ai nt i f f s Br i an Li cht enber g,

LLC and Br i an Li cht enber g s Ex Par t e Appl i cat i on f or a Tempor ar y

Rest r ai ni ng Or der . Havi ng consi der ed t he submi ssi ons of t he

par t i es, t he cour t deni es t he Appl i cat i on.

I. Background

Pl ai nt i f f Br i an Li cht enber g ( Br i an) desi gns cl ot hi ng and


2/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

accessor i es and di st r i but es hi s pr oduct s t hr ough Br i an Li cht enber g,

LLC. Br i an s desi gns i ncl ude a ser i es of par odi es of desi gner

brands, such as Homi s as a pl ay on Herms and Bucci , a

par ody of Gucci . Br i an s spoof or par ody l ogos mi mi c t he st yl e,f ont , and ot her el ement s of t he l uxur y br and desi gns. Br i an sel l s

shi r t s, sweat shi r t s, beani es, and hat s bear i ng t he var i ous spoof

desi gns. Br i an al l eges t hat hi s desi gns ar e f r equent l y wor n by

cel ebr i t i es and r ecogni zed by t he publ i c as Br i an s wor k.

Br i an s younger br other , Def endant Chr i st opher Wal t er

Li cht enber g ( Chr i s) i s t he CEO of Def endant Al ex and Chl oe, I nc.

( A&C) , whi ch oper ates a websi t e of i t s own ( t he AC websi t e) .

I n 2011, Br i an al l owed Chr i s t o t ake or der s f or Br i an s appar el on

t he AC websi t e. Br i an woul d f i l l or der s t aken by Chr i s, who woul d

col l ect f r om t he consumer and di st r i but e f i f t y per cent of t he

pr oceeds to Br i an. I n mi d- 2011, Br i an al l owed Chr i s to post

pr omot i onal pi ct ur es of Br i an s pr oduct s di r ect l y on t he AC websi t e

i n an ef f or t t o i ncr ease t r af f i c to t he si t e.Br i an al l eges t hat i n ear l y 2012, he came up wi t h t he i dea t o

parody t he l uxur y br and Bal mai n, and cr eated a dr awi ng f or a

desi gn i n t he st yl e of t he Bal mai n l ogo but r eadi ng Bal l i n Par i s

( t he Bal l i n Desi gn, Desi gn, or Bal l i n) . Br i an cl ai ms t hat he

showed t he Desi gn to Chr i s i n conf i dence i n March 2012.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

2


3/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

I n l ate 2012 or ear l y 2013, Br i an hi r ed Chr i s as an empl oyee. 1

Chr i s per f or med gr aphi c desi gn dut i es and pr ovi ded assi st ance wi t h

mar ket i ng and pr omot i onal act i vi t i es. As par t of t hese dut i es,

Chr i s hel ped Br i an cr af t and send an e- mai l r eadi ng, Bal l i n Wi t hMy Homi es t o Br i an s f ashi on i ndust r y cont act s t o pr omot e Br i an s

f or t hcomi ng l i ne of Bal l i n appar el . 2

Bet ween J anuary 21 and J anuary 31 2013, Chr i s cal l ed i n si ck

t o wor k sever al t i mes. Dur i ng t hat t i me, Chr i s cont act ed Br i an s

manuf act ur er i n Chi na. ( Decl ar at i on of Fl ai r Xu. ) Chr i s pl aced

l arge order s f or l abel s and gar ment s wi t h t he same measur ement s and

speci f i cat i ons as Br i an s pr oduct s, pur por t edl y f or use i n a new

cl ot hi ng l i ne t hat woul d be sol d wi t h [ Br i an] but on t he A&C

l abel . ( Xu Decl . 19- 21. ) Dur i ng t hat same t en day span, Chr i s

al l egedl y sent sampl es of A&C- l abel ed Bal l i n appar el t o Br i an s

i ndust r y cont act s. 3

On Febr uar y 1, 2013, Chr i s and/ or A&C post ed i mages of appar el

f eat ur i ng t he Bal l i n desi gn on soci al medi a. A&C- l abel ed Bal l i nappar el was l i st ed f or sal e on t he AC websi t e soon af t er . At some

1 The r ecor d i s uncl ear on when Chr i s became an empl oyee.Br i an s decl ar at i on st at es bot h t hat Chr i s began wor k on J anuar y21, 2013 and t hat Br i an was abl e t o af f or d Chr i s ser vi ces i nDecember 2012. Br i an s decl ar at i on f ur t her s t at es that Chr i shel ped wi t h a Bal l i n market i ng campai gn i n November . TheAppl i cat i on f or a TRO cl ai ms t hat Chr i s was an empl oyee i n November2012, but al so t hat Chr i s became a f ul l - t i me empl oyee i n J anuar y

2013.2 Whi l e t he Appl i cat i on asser t s t hat Chr i s was assi gned t o

conver t Br i an s hand- dr awn Bal l i n Desi gn i nt o el ect r oni c f or mat ,t he por t i on of Br i an s decl ar at i on ci t ed does not suppor t t hatcont ent i on.

3 At l east one of t hese cont act s, Ben Tayl or , l at er f or war dedhi s cor r espondence wi t h Chr i s t o Br i an. ( B. Li cht enber g Decl . , Ex.25. )

3


4/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

l at er poi nt i n t i me, Br i an br ought hi s own Bal l i n appar el t o mar ket

on hi s BLTEE l abel . Bot h Br i an and Chr i s cur r ent l y sel l vi r t ual l y

i dent i cal appar el bear i ng t he Bal l i n Desi gn.

As ear l y as March 14, 2013, Chr i s and/ or A&C sent cease anddesi st l et t er s t o Br i an s di str i but or s, cl ai mi ng t hat Chr i s

i nvent ed t he Bal l i n Desi gn and demandi ng t hat di st r i but or s cease

sel l i ng Br i an s Bal l i n pr oduct s. Chr i s al so mai nt ai ned an act i ve

soci al medi a pr esence, wi t h whi ch he f r equent l y cl ai med t o be t he

aut hor of t he desi gn and st at ed t hat Br i an st ol e t he Bal l i n desi gn

f r om hi m. ( See, e. g. i d. 131 ( no conf usi on necessary. The

Bal l i n Par i s desi gn was made by us her e at [ A&C] , not#Lyi nBr i an l ol

. . . . . )

Br i an f r equent l y post ed i mages of cel ebr i t i es and model s

wear i ng Br i an s Bal l i n mer chandi se on soci al medi a pages. At l east

some of t hese per sonal i t i es expr essl y gr ant ed Br i an per mi ssi on t o

post t he phot ogr aphs. ( B. Li cht enber g Decl . 126, 133. ) I n

sever al cases, i dent i cal i mages soon appear ed on A&C s pages,usual l y i dent i f yi ng t he gar ment s depi ct ed as an or i gi nal Al ex &

Chl oe Bal l i n Par i s desi gn, by Al ex & Chl oe, or ot her wor ds t o

t hat ef f ect . ( I d. 133- 144. ) The subj ect s of t he phot os di d not

aut hor i ze Chr i s t o use t he i mages. I n one i nst ance, a model

depi ct ed i n an i mage post ed t o an A&C websi t e went so f ar as t o

comment t hat she was wear i ng one of Br i an s sweat shi r t s, not an A&C

pr oduct . ( I d. 131. ) A&C r esponded, [ a] ct ual l y t he BALLI N PARI S

desi gn i ncl udi ng t hi s sweat shi r t you ar e wear i ng i s an Or i gi nal and

Of f i ci al desi gn by [ A&C] NOT [ Br i an] . . . . ( I d. )

I n Mar ch 2013, Pl ai nt i f f s f i l ed a sui t agai nst Chr i s and A&C

i n Los Angel es Count y Super i or Cour t . Pl ai nt i f f s obt ai ned a

4


5/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

t empor ar y r est r ai ni ng or der , but wer e not successf ul i n t hei r

mot i on f or a pr el i mi nar y i nj unct i on. Pl ai nt i f f s t hen di smi ssed

t hei r st at e cour t act i on and, on Sept ember 17, 2013, f i l ed t he

i nstant sui t i n t hi s cour t . Pl ai nt i f f s compl ai nt al l eges sevencauses of act i on agai nst Def endant s, i ncl udi ng causes of act i on

under st at e l aw and t he Lanham Act , 15 U. S. C. 1125. Pl ai nt i f f s

now seek a Tempor ary Rest r ai ni ng Or der ( TRO) .

II. Legal Standard

A t emporar y rest r ai ni ng or der i s meant t o be used onl y i n

ext r aor di nar y ci r cumst ances. To est abl i sh ent i t l ement t o a TRO,

t he r equest i ng par t y must show ( 1) t hat she i s l i kel y t o succeed

on t he mer i t s, ( 2) t hat she i s l i kel y t o suf f er i r r epar abl e har m

i n t he absence of pr el i mi nar y r el i ef , ( 3) t hat t he bal ance of

equi t i es t i ps i n her f avor , and ( 4) t hat an i nj uncti on i s i n t he

publ i c i nt er est . Wi nt er v. Nat ur al Res. Def ense Counsel , 555 U. S.

7, 20 ( 2008) . A TRO may be war r anted wher e a par t y ( 1) shows a

combi nat i on of pr obabl e success on t he mer i t s and t he possi bi l i t yof i r r epar abl e har m, or ( 2) r ai ses ser i ous quest i ons and t he

bal ance of hardshi ps t i ps i n f avor of a TRO. See Ar camuzi v.

Cont i nent al Ai r Li nes, I nc. , 819 F. 2d 935, 937 ( 9t h Ci r . 1987) .

These two f or mul at i ons r epr esent t wo poi nt s on a sl i di ng scal e i n

whi ch t he r equi r ed degr ee of i r r epar abl e har m i ncr eases as t he

pr obabi l i t y of success decr eases. I d. Under bot h f or mul at i ons,

however , t he par t y must demonst r at e a f ai r chance of success on

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

5


6/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

t he mer i t s and a si gni f i cant t hr eat of i r r epar abl e i nj ur y. 4

I d. III. Discussion

Pl ai nt i f f s have pr ovi ded ext ensi ve evi dent i ar y suppor t f or

t hei r Appl i cat i on i n t he f or m of decl ar at i ons, e- mai l s,phot ogr aphs, and scr een shot s spanni ng appr oxi mat el y one t housand

pages. Pl ai nt i f f s l egal t heor i es, however , ar e devel oped l ess

t hor oughl y. Much of Pl ai nt i f f s memor andum i n suppor t of t hei r

Appl i cat i on f ocuses on unf ai r compet i t i on under t he Lanham Act .

Pl ai nt i f f s Compl ai nt , however , l umps t oget her Lanham Act cl ai ms

f or t r ademar k i nf r i ngement , t r ade dr ess i nf r i ngement , f al se

desi gnat i on of or i gi n, and t r ademar k di l ut i on i nt o one si ngl e

cause of act i on. Pl ai nt i f f s Appl i cat i on f or a TRO appear s t o

f ocus on t he t r ademar k cl ai m. ( App. at 16 ( Pl ai nt i f f s ar e

ent i t l ed t o pr ot ect i on of i t s unr egi st er ed t r ademar k names . . .

. ) . )

The anal ysi s f or an unr egi st er ed t r ademar k i s si mi l ar t o t hat

f or t r ade dr ess. I nt l J ensen, I nc. v. Met r osound U. S. A. , I nc. , 4F. 3d 819, 824 ( 9t h Ci r . 1993) . Pl ai nt i f f s must show t hat an

unr egi st er ed t r ademar k or t r ade dr ess i s nonf unct i onal , i s

di st i nct i ve or has acqui r ed secondar y meani ng, and t hat a

def endant s use of a si mi l ar mar k or t r ade dr ess i s l i kel y t o

conf use consumer s. I d. at 824- 25.

Pl ai nt i f f s Appl i cat i on and Compl ai nt , however , do not

cl ear l y i dent i f y t he par t i cul ar mar k or t r ade dr ess t hat f or ms t he

4 Even under t he ser i ous i nt er est s sl i di ng scal e t est , apl ai nt i f f must sat i sf y the f our Wi nt er f act or s and demonst r at et hat t her e i s a l i kel i hood of i r r epar abl e i nj ur y and t hat t hei nj unct i on i s i n t he publ i c i nt er est. Al l i ance f or t he Wi l dRocki es v. Cot t r el l , 632 F. 3d 1127, 1135 ( 9t h Ci r . 2011) .

6


7/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

basi s of Pl ai nt i f f s unf ai r compet i t i on cl ai m. Pl ai nt i f f s

Appl i cat i on, f or exampl e, r ef er s t o unr egi st er ed mar ks Bal l i n

Par i s, Homi es, Fl i ne, Cani n, and Bucci , but al so t he

cut , col or , s tyl e, f abr i c, s t i t chi ng, l abel s i zes , t ext , l ogopl acement , f ont , and packagi ng of Br i an s pr oduct s. ( App. at 14,

16. ) The compl ai nt r ef er s i n one pl ace t o t he name Bal l i n and

Bal l i n Par i s ( Compl . 102, ) , but i mmedi at el y t her eaf t er r ef er s

t o wr ongf ul appr opr i at i on of f abr i cs, st i t chi ng, and l abel

l ocat i on ( Compl . 103) , and yet el sewher e def i nes t he BRI AN

LI CHTENBERG Tr ademark as compr i sed of f ashi on appar el ,

mer chandi se and accessor i es. ( Compl . 22. ) Wi t hout a bet t er

sense of whi ch mar ks or t r ade dr ess Pl ai nt i f f s seek t o pr ot ect , i t

i s i mpossi bl e f or t hi s cour t t o anal yze f uncti onal i t y,

di st i nct i veness, or l i kel i hood of conf usi on, and t hus t o det er mi ne

t he l i kel i hood t hat Pl ai nt i f f s wi l l succeed on t he mer i t s of any

of t hei r i nf r i ngement cl ai ms. 5

Pl ai nt i f f s al so seek a TRO on t he basi s of t hei r Lanham Actf al se adver t i si ng cl ai m, Cal i f or ni a Uni f or m Tr ade Secret s Act

cl ai m, and i nt ent i onal i nt er f er ence wi t h cont r act and pr ospect i ve

economi c r el at i ons cl ai ms. Beyond gener al l y and concl usor i l y

cont est i ng aut hor shi p of t he Bal l i n Desi gn, Def endant s opposi t i on

does not addr ess t hese cl ai ms. Whi l e Pl ai nt i f f s t hemsel ves devot e

f ar l ess at t ent i on t o t hese cl ai ms t han t he i nf r i ngement cl ai ms,

t he r ecor d pr esent ed coul d suppor t a f i ndi ng of l i kel y success on

5 Pl ai nt i f f s cannot possi bl y hope, f or exampl e, t o succeed ona cl ai m t hat t hey have a cl ai m t o a t r ademar k i n f ashi on appar el ,merchandi se and accessor i es. Some combi nat i on of t he var i ousel ement s i dent i f i ed above, however , mi ght concei vabl y warr antt r ademar k or t r ade dr ess prot ect i on.

7


8/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

t he mer i t s. Ther e i s ampl e evi dence t hat Chr i s appr opr i at ed

Br i an s promot i onal phot os and made st at ement s cl ai mi ng or

suggest i ng t hat t he appar el depi ct ed t her ei n was hi s, not Br i an s.

See Sout hl and Sod Farms v. Stover Seed Co. , 108 F. 3d 1134, 1139( 9t h Ci r . 1997) ( l i st i ng el ement s of Lanham Act f al se adver t i si ng

cl ai m) . I t al so appear s beyond di sput e t hat Chr i s cont act ed

Br i an s cust omer s, encour aged t hem t o st op doi ng busi ness wi t h

Br i an, and cl ai med Br i an i s a t hi ef . See Kor ea Suppl y Co. v.

Lockheed Mar t i n Cor p. , 29 Cal . 4t h 1134, 1153 ( 2003) ( l i st i ng

el ement s of i nt ent i onal i nt er f er ence wi t h pr ospect i ve economi c

advant age cl ai m) ; Quel i mane Co. v. St ewar t Ti t l e Guar ant y Co. , 19

Cal . 4t h 26, 55 ( 1998) ( l i st i ng el ement s of i nt er f er ence wi t h

cont r act cl ai m) .

Never t hel ess, t he cour t does not addr ess Pl ai nt i f f s

l i kel i hood of success i n f ur t her dept h because Pl ai nt i f f s have

f ai l ed t o adequat el y show i r r epar abl e har m. I n anal yzi ng

i r r eparabl e harm, cour t s shoul d t ake i nt o account whether a movantproceeded as qui ckl y as i t coul d have i n seeki ng a TRO. Appl e,

I nc. v. Samsung El ect r oni cs Co. , Lt d. , 678 F. 3d 1314, 1325 ( Fed.

Ci r . 2012) ( anal yzi ng a pr el i mi nar y i nj unct i on) . At t he TRO

st age, cour t s consi der whether t he movant woul d have been abl e t o

f i l e a not i ced pr el i mi nar y i nj unct i on mot i on had i t act ed

di l i gent l y. See, e. g. , Occupy Sacr ament o v. Ci t y of Sacr ament o,

2: 11CV02873MCE, 2011 WL 5374748, at *4 ( E. D. Cal . Nov. 4, 2011)

( denyi ng appl i cat i on f or TRO f or t went y- f i ve day del ay) ; Mammoth

Speci al t y Lodgi ng, LLC v. We- Ka- J assa I nv. Fund, LLC, CI VS10- 0864

LKK/ J FM, 2010 WL 1539811, at *2 ( E. D. Cal . Apr . 16, 2010) ; Rosal

8


9/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

v. Fi r st Fed. Bank of Cal i f or ni a, No. C 09- 1276 PJ H, 2009 WL

837570, at *2 ( N. D. Cal . Mar . 26, 2009) .

Her e, t he vast maj or i t y of Chr i s al l eged mi sappr opr i at i on of

phot ogr aphs and wr ongf ul cont act wi t h Br i an s di st r i but or s andcust omers appear s t o have t aken pl ace i n bet ween Febr uar y and

Apr i l 2013, appr oxi matel y si x t o ei ght mont hs ago. The most

r ecent such i nst ance appear s t o have occur r ed on May 18, 2013,

over f i ve mont hs ago. ( Decl arat i on of Reda Bouai ssa 66. ) 6 Whi l e

Pl ai nt i f f s at t r i but e t he r oughl y t hi r t y- day del ay bet ween t he

f i l i ng of t hei r compl ai nt and t he i nst ant Appl i cat i on t o t he

necessi t y of pr epar i ng vol umi nous document ar y suppor t , Pl ai nt i f f s

make no at t empt t o expl ai n why t hey di d not seek pr el i mi nary

r el i ef her e unt i l si x t o ei ght mont hs af t er t he al l eged wr ongf ul

act s occur r ed. 7 Pl ai nt i f f s do not cont end, nor has t he cour t f ound

any evi dence, t hat Chr i s al l eged wr ongf ul act s per si st ed beyond

May 2013 or are cont i nui ng. Accordi ngl y, t he cour t cannot

concl ude t hat Pl ai nt i f f s wi l l suf f er i r r epar abl e har m i n t heabsence of a TRO.

/ / /

/ / /

6 The cour t not es t hat Pl ai nt i f f s ci t at i ons t o t he r ecor d i nsuppor t of t hei r showi ng of i r r epar abl e har m ar e ext r emel yunf ocused. Pl ai nt i f f s ci t e, f or exampl e, over a dozen exhi bi t s andappr oxi matel y one hundr ed paragr aphs of wi t ness decl arat i ons f or

t he pr oposi t i on t hat Chr i s act i ons ar e cur r ent l y doi ng i nj ur y t oBr i an s r eput at i on. Sever al of Pl ai nt i f f s ci t at i ons, however , arecompl et el y unr el at ed t o t hat cl ai m. ( See, e. g. , B. Li cht enber gDecl . 72 ( On or about J anuary 25, 2013, I l earned t hat Chr i s wasst i l l si ck f r om t he day bef or e and was bed r i dden and f eel i nghor r i bl e. )

7 The st at e cour t deni ed Pl ai nt i f f s pr el i mi nar y i nj unct i ver el i ef on Apr i l 19, 2013. ( Def endendant s Request f or J udi ci alNot i ce, Ex. J . )

9


10/10

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IV. Conclusion

For t he r easons st at ed above, Pl ai nt i f f s Appl i cat i on f or a

Temporar y Rest r ai ni ng Or der i s DENI ED, wi t hout prej udi ce.

I T I S SO ORDERED.

Dat ed: Oct ober 25, 2013DEAN D. PREGERSONUni t ed St at es Di st r i ct J udge

10

Documents

Brian Lichtenberg v. Alex & Chloe - TRO Order