), Defendant is a California limited liability company formed by business partners Bert Sandell and Albert Hill, Jr., located in Los Altos, California. 's Opp'n to Def. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2010) Modified on 2/18/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). at 8-9. q Equally unpersuasive is Defendant's contention that Plaintiff had no basis upon which to rely on section 2(f) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. In what amounts to a final blow to Antiochs Measure T and the environmentalists efforts to stop the long-planned new home developments in the citys Sand Creek area, on June 7, 2021, a Contra Costa Superior Court judge ruled in favor of Oak Hill Park Company in their lawsuit against the City of Antioch to prevent the council from IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION to Of Frank D. Rorie JR. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Non-Government Works Copyright 2001-2023 Think Computer Corporation. 0000005191 00000 n 1052(f) (emphasis added). '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. L.) In contrast, Defendant merely purchases, owns, sells, manages and leases commercial properties for its own account. 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. Given Plaintiff's concession that the parties' customers are sophisticated and are unlikely to confuse the two companies, the Court finds that this factor weighs in favor of Defendant. SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC, a Delaware limited liability company: Defendant - Appellee,: SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC, a California limited liability company: Case Number: 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. Legal Name Sand Hill Global Advisors, LLC. Factual findings are reviewed for clear error. See Fed.R.Civ.P. (jlsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/17/2009) (Entered: 09/17/2009), AMENDED ANSWER to 1 Complaint bySand Hill Advisors LLC. Plaintiff is a so-called "wealth management" firm that caters to high net worth individuals. 's Mot. Commack Self-Service Kosher Meats, Inc. v. Hooker, Cunney v. Bd. 0000000596 00000 n (Opp'n at 13.) Here, Plaintiff has adduced no evidence to show that its advertising and marketing efforts were effective. 2753, 120 L.Ed.2d 615 (1992). 's Mot. 79, Filing 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[.]"). Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. ***Civil Case Terminated. Two Pesos, 505 U.S. at 769, 112 S.Ct. Plaintiff argues that this factor is germane only where the marks are different, and inapposite in cases such as the present where the marks are identical. To request information suppression, updates, or additions, contact us about this docket. 0000000736 00000 n (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). AMENDED ORDER re 91 Order. Sand Hill Global Advisors was founded in 1982 and is based in Palo Alto, California. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case. (Mot. "The `true test of secondary meaning' is the effectiveness of the advertising effort." of Court Order Continuing CMC; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. Rather, the relevant inquiry is whether, upon consideration of all terms comprising a composite mark, "the term is being used geographically." 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. (Davidson's Reply Decl. Only admissible evidence may be considered in ruling on a motion for motion for summary judgment. D.) At the time of the most recent name change, Plaintiff was located at 3000 Sand Hill Road in Menlo Park, California, which is part of what is commonly referred to as the "Silicon Valley." [2] Registration of a mark is prima facie evidence of its validity, as well as its owner's entitlement to use the mark exclusively as specified in the registration. 0000002307 00000 n at 24:1.). at 131:9-10; Davidson Decl. 0000001069 00000 n Others say he should have named names. All but one of the Sleekcraft factors strongly favor Defendant, and none favor Plaintiff. 2505. 57. HWn:SjA-**KiH:u@rR5gEIVzv/6"?3ofJy'}J"Hz?pO2>NOklkI-'[cB9P0o '/{'{np"&}x\A0y68l\z?|. 92, Filing CIV S-02-0704 FCD DAD, 2007 WL 988054 at *2 (E.D. See McSherry v. City of Long Beach, 584 F.3d 1129, 1138 (9th Cir.2009) ("Summary judgment requires facts, not simply unsupported denials or rank speculation"). 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? (Entered: 12/15/2008), CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge. Save 25% on a pre-paid one year subscription. Here, the services offered by Plaintiff and Defendant are fundamentally distinct. No one has written a summary of this case yet. "If the evidence is merely colorable, or is not significantly probative, summary judgment may be granted." 0000000913 00000 n Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC Filing 92 AMENDED ORDER re 91 Order, Terminate Motions,,,,,. [1] Plaintiff objects to the declaration of Albert Hill on the ground that he did not sign it under penalty of perjury. Applied Info. Like Boston Private Financial, which manages about $4 billion of assets, Sand Hill has placed an emphasis on serving owners and operators of private businesses, a largely underserved market, Mr. Pressey said. ANE Holdings, LLC et al. Even if section 2(f) were applicable, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite five years of exclusive and continuous use. This contention lacks merit. In February of 2012, the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Michigan filed a lawsuit on behalf of nine Michigan citizens who were sentenced to life 0 at 12-13. 2. On January 26, 2010, the Court issued its Order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant.1 See Order Granting Def. at 24:1-14.) The Rodeo Collection court held that under both tests, the mark "Rodeo Collection," and the component term "Collection" were "more than merely descriptive as used to identify a shopping center." Prods., Inc. v. Beckman Instruments, Inc., 718 F.2d 1201, 1206 (1st Cir. "The latter three categories of marks, because their intrinsic nature, serves to identify a particular source of a product, are deemed inherently distinctive and are entitled to protection." 1997). Complaint; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. The matter has been fully briefed, and is now ripe for determination. 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. Having failed to show secondary meaning, Plaintiff cannot establish that it possesses a protectable mark, which is an essential element of its claim for service mark infringement. "Advisors" aptly describes the nature of Plaintiff's business; to wit, it advises clients on maintaining and building their wealth. 2753. Id. Signed by Mediator, James Gilliland, dated 5/19/2009. at 80:15, 81:21-22. 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. Thus, despite Defendant's protestations the contrary, Mr. Conway's deposition testimony does not show that Plaintiff "knew" that it lacked a protectable mark. 61, 64, 84, 85 Defendant. (Opp'n at 22.) The top five bank holding companies have combined total consumer loan portfolios of more than $1.8 trillion as of December 31, 2022. E, F, H, K, L; Williams Depo. (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/22/2009) Modified on 12/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Thus, despite the fact that the marks at issue are identical, the Court finds that the undisputed fact that the parties operate in different markets involving distinct consumers and are not competitors renders this factor, at best, neutral. NOTICE OF REFERENCE AND ORDER SCHEDULING HEARING: Hearing set for 04/08/2010 at 10:00 AM, re 61 Motion for Attorney Fees. Defendant filed a reply memorandum, and the matter is now fully briefed. C 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. (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, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Exhibit M, # 14 Exhibit N, # 15 Exhibit O, # 16 Exhibit P, # 17 Exhibit Q, # 18 Exhibit R)(Related document(s) 36 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 11/19/2009) (Entered: 11/19/2009), MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Cons Only location is in downtown Palo Alto, not in the hub of the city or on the legendary Sand Hill Road. In Support Of Motion To Compel Arbitration; As To Parties: removed. "Marks are often classified in categories of generally increasing distinctiveness; they may be (1) generic; (2) descriptive; (3) suggestive; (4) arbitrary; or (5) fanciful." Founded Date Jan 1, 1982. endstream endobj 11 0 obj<> endobj 12 0 obj<> endobj 13 0 obj<> endobj 14 0 obj<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]/ExtGState<>>> endobj 15 0 obj<> endobj 16 0 obj<> endobj 17 0 obj<> endobj 18 0 obj[/ICCBased 27 0 R] endobj 19 0 obj[20 0 R 21 0 R 22 0 R 23 0 R] endobj 20 0 obj<>stream Sand Hill, which caters primarily to high-net-worth individuals in Northern California, has $900 million of assets under management. Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. (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. Outside of work Brenda is a dedicated mother who loves spending time with her family and exploring all the Bay Area has to offer. 0000001201 00000 n While that may have been one of Plaintiff's motivations, Defendant cites no authority to support the conclusion that such a desire is sufficient to justify the imposition of attorneys' fees under the Lanham Act. "While an intent to confuse consumers is not required for a finding of trademark infringement, intent to deceive is strong evidence of a likelihood of confusion." Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. C at 80:1-82:9, Dkt. Sand Hill Global Advisors (SHGA) has taken out a government-backed coronavirus relief loan, the $2.7bn RIA disclosed in a recent Form ADV update. 10; Davidson Decl. In fact, Plaintiff readily acknowledges that Defendant places its banners on buildings while Plaintiff uses them at sponsored events. 1052(f) (emphasis added). (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 2/3/2009) Modified on 2/4/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). DocketComplaint; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. Though existing in various incarnations since 1982, in March 1995, Plaintiff changed its name to "Sand Hill Advisors, Inc." At that time, Plaintiff's offices were located at 3000 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, California. Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC, SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC, a California limited liability company. at 212:7-10. The court explained that there are two tests to determine the strength of a mark in the marketplace: the "imagination test" and the "need test." "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." Cir.2009). There are three ways in which a plaintiff can establish that it has a protectable interest in a service mark or trademark: "(1) it has a federally registered mark in goods or services; (2) its mark is descriptive but has acquired a secondary meaning in the market; or (3) it has a suggestive mark, which is inherently distinctive and protectable." Def. 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. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/12/2010) Modified on 1/13/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 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. The Court thus finds that this factor favors Defendant. The Court conducted an hour-long hearing on the motion on January 12, 2010. Surfvivor Media, Inc. v. Survivor Prods., 406 F.3d 625, 630 (9th Cir. Here, Plaintiff asserts that its evidence shows that since it changed its name in 1995 to "Sand Hill Advisors," it has advertised the mark through a variety of *1118 channels. First Republic Bank was shuttered by regulators early Monday, and all its deposits and most of its assets were acquired by JPMorgan. at 24:9-14.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James on 6/1/2010. (Entered: 12/02/2009). 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. To update this case yourself, sign into PACER (paid PACER subscription required). In addition, Plaintiff ignores that "[t] he question is whether the phrase can be construed to mean that the product is made in a certain locale." Ex. Green Valley Corporation, a company under developer Barry Swenson Builder, sold the lot to Sand Hill's limited liability partnership, Four Corners EPA Property Owner LLC. Applied Info. Pretrial Conference set for 2/16/2010 01:00 PM.. 2753. Notice of Settlement Conference and Settlement Conference Order for 1/13/2010 02:00 PM in Courtroom F, 15th Floor, San Francisco. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia. (quoting Union Carbide Corp. v. Ever-Ready Inc., 531 F.2d 366, 379 (7th Cir. The similarity of the marks, proximity of the goods or service and marketing channels used constitute "the controlling troika in the Sleekcraft analysis," GoTo.com, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co., 202 F.3d 1199, 1205 (9th Cir.2000), and are considered the most important, see Brookfield Commc'ns, Inc. v. W. Coast Entm't Corp., 174 F.3d 1036, 1055 n. 16 (9th Cir.1999). (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/25/2010) Modified on 1/26/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). VS ADAM B. Entrepreneur Media, 279 F.3d at 1148. The Court has concluded above that "Sand Hill Advisors" is primarily geographically descriptive, which supports the conclusion that the mark is weak. 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"). (Hill Decl. In June 1982, CLW Financial Services, Inc., became known as Conway, Luongo, Williams, Inc. (Id. Ex. 0000013022 00000 n Plaintiff's ancillary contention that "Sand Hill Advisors" satisfies the "need test" fares no better. ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong GRANTING 36 Motion for Summary Judgment. <<22A12329BFF53A46B00346188163DD72>]>> 0 72(b)(1); Civ. STIPULATION AND ORDER: To Allow Defendant to Amend Answer, Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 5/27/09. Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763, 768 (1992). The adviser's REGISTRATION status is listed below. 0000004984 00000 n 84. Operating Status Active. Stephen W. Boney, Inc. v. Boney Servs., Inc., 127 F.3d 821, 827 (9th Cir. (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/4/2008) (Entered: 11/06/2008). (Opp'n at 14.) 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."). 0000002351 00000 n Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. 's Mot. at 7-10.) (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2010) Modified on 1/27/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Rodeo Collection, 812 F.2d at 1218. Indus. Plaintiff admittedly has no direct evidence of Defendant's intent to deceive, but instead claims that such intent can be inferred on the ground that Mr. Hill denied knowing about Plaintiff's existence at the time he registered Defendant as a limited liability company in 1999. 61, 64, 84, 85 (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/6/2008) (Entered: 11/06/2008), ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 2/3/2009. (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/15/2008) Modified on 12/16/2008 (cjl, COURT STAFF). As set forth in the Court's summary judgment order, Defendant raised a number of potentially viable arguments to show that its mark is suggestive, notwithstanding Plaintiff's acknowledgement. Case Referred to Magistrate Judge for MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE to be held between 01/13/10 ant 01/22/10; Case Referred to Mediation. 41, Filing That section states, in relevant part, as follows: "The Director may accept as prima facie evidence that the mark has become distinctive, as used on or in connection with the applicant's goods in commerce, proof of substantially exclusive and continuous use thereof as a mark by the applicant in commerce for the five years before the date on which the claim of distinctiveness is made." Though Plaintiff was unsuccessful in pressing this point, the Court notes that Plaintiff's argument was not frivolous.2. 56, Filing (Williams Decl. 3-5.) 0000001160 00000 n (Conway Depo. United States District Court, N.D. California, Oakland Division.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png. (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. for Summ. at 13-18. 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. See Japan Telecom, Inc. v. Japan Telecom Am. 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. Id. The Ninth Circuit construes the "exceptional cases" requirement narrowly. At the other end of the spectrum are generic marks, which are not protected. Def. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 2/20/09. At his deposition, Mr. Hill testified that he made an effort to determine whether the domain name www.sandhill advisors.com was available, but denied using an internet search engine such as Google to ascertain whether another company already was using the name "Sand Hill Advisors." Yet, there is no evidence to support Plaintiff's assertion that "Sand Hill" evokes an "entrepreneurial" spirit. In addition, Defendant ignores the evidence proffered by Plaintiff, and cited by the Magistrate, that Plaintiff desired to protect the goodwill that it believed it had established by operating under the Sand Hill Advisors name. STRUCK IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, Declaration - DECLARATION OF DENIS SHMIDT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS AND CROSS-DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT ADAM B. The moving party bears the initial burden of demonstrating the basis for the motion and identifying the portions of the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, affidavits, and admissions on file that establish the absence of a triable issue of material fact. Of Vill. No calendar events were found for this docket. HWv6}WGj}I-Y]Ih RdJRx>#wHY 8}9|n{oXxlW0A(x{3|ZUzjlWgQ?mf7Es2P2AB& nwdse%7YPI*eoFH1GI!| 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. (mejlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2010). 28 U.S.C. In certain cases, "[e]vidence of use and advertising over a substantial period of time is enough to establish secondary meaning." Nearly two years after its last loan, the Paycheck Protection Program is still making headlines for all the wrong reasons, unfortunately. Ex. REFER TO DOCUMENT 50 . Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763, 768, 112 S.Ct. 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. Jim Iuorio: The Fed will probably be dovish for a little longer. 88, Filing "Marks are often classified in categories of generally increasing distinctiveness; . On February 9, 2010, Defendant filed a motion for attorneys' fees, which was referred to Magistrate Judge James ("the Magistrate"). ORDER REFERRING MOTION re 61 Motion for Attorney Fees. Alternatively, the Court concluded that even if 2(f) were germane, Plaintiff had failed to demonstrate the requisite five years of exclusive and continuous use. WebGet free access to the complete judgment in SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC v. SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC on CaseMine. "Exceptional circumstances can be found when the non-prevailing party's case is groundless, unreasonable, vexatious, or pursued in bad faith." 0000010111 00000 n The amount of protection accorded to a particular mark is a function of its distinctiveness. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 4/22/2010. The mere fact that a mark references a geographic location does not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that the mark is descriptive. (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. CV-08-5016-SBA ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SAND HILL ADVISORS LLC'S STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 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. As such, even if section 2(f) could be applied to unregistered marks, the record demonstrates that Plaintiff cannot demonstrate the requisite five years of substantially exclusive and continuous use. Executive Compensation has grown increasingly complicated. Forschner, 30 F.3d at 355 (emphasis added). (Entered: 02/19/2009), CLERKS NOTICE Case Management Conference set for 2/18/2009 02:45 PM. 62-5; see also R&R at 6-7, Dkt. (Dhillon, Jas) (Filed on 1/29/2009) Modified on 1/30/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Messrs. Sandell and Hill filed their Limited Liability Company Articles of Organization with the California Secretary of State on April 27, 1999. 91, Filing %%EOF 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. The parties are presently before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Def. (Entered: 01/21/2010), Minute Entry: Settlement Conference held on 1/13/10 before Magistrate Judge James Larson. 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. Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Management, LLC (Defendant); Struck Capital Fund GP LLC (Defendant) et al. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2009) Modified on 2/25/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 1/26/10. The greater the similarity between the two marks at issue, the greater the likelihood of confusion. Plaintiff summarily asserts that "there is no need for other wealth management firms to use `Sand Hill Advisors' in describing or advertising their services." Lahoti, 586 F.3d at 1197. trailer (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/5/2009) Modified on 1/6/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). In the instant case, the "Sand Hill Mark" was never registered by Plaintiff, and as such, no presumption of secondary use could have arisen, even if Plaintiff now could show retrospectively that it meets the requirements of section 2(f). (Martin, James) (Filed on 12/11/2009) Modified on 12/14/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). After considering the motion on the papers submitted, the Magistrate issued a thorough, fourteen-page order in which she recommended denying Defendant's motion. The recommendation of the Magistrate is ADOPTED and Defendant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees is DENIED. 10. (Opp'n at 22-23.) Typically, Defendant purchases commercial property, which it then assigns to another limited liability company or entity owned by Messrs. Sandell and Hill. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 06/23/10. Whether a mark has acquired secondary meaning generally presents a question of fact. 10; Davidson Decl. Mar. MC/ at 115:11-22.) (Entered: 05/28/2009), STIPULATION to Amend Defendant Sand Hill Advisors LLC's Answer and Affirmative Defenses, filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC., Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Two Pesos, 505 U.S. at 769, 112 S.Ct. 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.'" WebSand Hill: a California Financial Planning and Wealth Management Firm, 245 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA, 94301, United States (650) 854-9150 amy@select-advisors.com Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. 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. As to the word "Advisors," the PTO found that such term is generic or descriptive, and that its inclusion in the proposed mark did not diminish its finding that the mark is primarily geographically descriptive.

Things To Do In Stroudsburg, Pa In October, Katie Liner Pettit, First Families Of Bledsoe County, Tennessee, Leon And Edelstein's Latin Delicatessen, Articles S