(Download) "Lorillard Tobacco Company v. John Doe Corp." by In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Lorillard Tobacco Company v. John Doe Corp.
- Author : In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- Release Date : January 28, 2004
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 74 KB
Description
Argued June 15, 2004 PRECEDENTIAL This case concerns a District Court's refusal to issue, at the behest of cigarette manufacturer Lorillard Tobacco Co. (""Lorillard""), ex parte orders directing the seizure from three New Jersey retailers (collectively, the ""defendants"") of allegedly counterfeit Newport brand cigarettes, under the Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984 (the ""Act""), Pub. L. No. 98-473, Title II, ch. XV, 98 Stat. 2178, codified in relevant part at 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d). In ruling on Lorillard's applications for ex parte seizure, the District Court declined to find, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d), either that (1) ""an order other than an ex parte seizure order is not adequate to achieve the purposes of section 1114 [relating to counterfeited trademarks],"" or (2) the defendants or their associates ""would destroy, move, hide, or otherwise make [the counterfeit] matter inaccessible to the court, if [Lorillard] were to proceed on notice."" Accordingly, the District Court refused to issue the requested seizure orders, and for two of the defendants issued broad temporary restraining orders (TROs), one of which is rescribed infra note 2. Finding that the District Court correctly interpreted § 1114(d), that its factual findings are not clearly erroneous, and that it did not abuse its discretion, we will affirm. I. Facts and Procedural History Lorillard is the holder of several registered trademarks affiliated with the Newport brand of mentholated cigarettes. As the number one brand of menthol cigarettes (and the overall number two brand) in the United States, the Newport brand has become a target of counterfeit cigarette makers. This is a consolidated appeal of three cases against three different defendants who allegedly dealt in these counterfeit Newport cigarettes. Each of the cases was pursued separately in the District Court, though all three were heard by the same District Judge. The cases are, in every relevant sense, indistinguishable, and the record in one case (against Edwin Liquor Store) establishes the reasons for the District Court's refusal to issue the ex parte seizure orders requested in all three cases. For the sake of completeness, we will briefly describe the procedural history of the other cases as well.