STRUCK CAPITAL SPECIAL SITUATIONS MANAGEMENT LLC, DIVERGENCE DIGITAL CURRENCY MANAGEMENT LLC, 8/3/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION), 2/3/2023: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information, 10/12/2022: Notice - OF COURT ORDER CONTINUING CMC, 10/4/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE RE: ARBITRATION), 2/3/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE RE: ARBITRATION), 7/8/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF FRANK D. RORIE JR. 72(b)(1); Civ. (Entered: 12/22/2009), *** Exhibit C FILED IN ERROR. Prods., Inc. v. Beckman Instruments, Inc., 718 F.2d 1201, 1206 (1st Cir. STIPULATION AND ORDER re Pretrial Schedule. 83, Filing Gary Conway testified at his deposition that the founders selected the "Sand Hill" name because the firm's offices were located on Sand Hill Road and they wanted to "trumpet" their location due to its "cache." (Entered: 12/11/2009), ORDER by Judge ARMSTRONG granting 40 Ex Parte Application (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/4/2009), Ex Parte MOTION to Modify Briefing Schedule re Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. 33 15 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. (Davidson Decl. they may be (1) generic; (2) descriptive; (3) suggestive; (4) arbitrary; or (5) fanciful." To establish service mark infringement under the Lanham Act, the plaintiff must show that (1) it has a valid, protectable mark, and (2) defendant's use of the mark is likely to cause confusion. Ex. 2000) (internal quotation marks omitted). THE KUHN FOUNDATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL. 58, Filing 0000004984 00000 n See Applied Info. The central bank's instant payment system could bring enormous benefits to banks and their customers. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/25/2010) Modified on 1/26/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). The district court must review de novo "those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 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. 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. 's Mot. (Court Reporter: Not Reported) (jlsec, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/13/2010) Modified on 1/15/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 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.R. Plaintiff has filed an opposition to the motion, accompanied by objections to certain of the evidence offered by Defendant in support of its motion. To update this case yourself, sign into PACER (paid PACER subscription required). <<4841BC4BF8452A4DA9F87B341F4BADE3>]>> at 207:11-19.) 10; Davidson Decl. See Report and Recommendation Re: Def. 2008). Defendant now moves this Court for a de novo determination of the Magistrate's recommendation, and requests that the Court grant its motion for attorneys' fees. (Entered: 01/29/2009), ADR Clerks Notice Setting ADR Phone Conference on 2/10/09 at 11:00 a.m. 's Mot. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC v. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC. 1. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2010) Modified on 1/27/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). STRUCK, ET AL. *1122 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket 36) is GRANTED. Cir.2009). Boston Private said it would pay 70% of the purchase price in cash and the rest in stock. Def. "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." (Id. Last Updated January 6, 2019 at 8:27 PM EST (4.3 years ago). trailer See Aromatique, Inc. v. Gold Seal, Inc., 28 F.3d 863, 870 (8th Cir.1994) (plaintiff could not rely on presumption of secondary meaning where it alleged that defendant infringed in 1985, but the mark was not registered until 1988); 2 McCarthy 11:13 ("The presumption to which a 2(f) registration is entitled is not that the designation is inherently distinctive, but that it had acquired secondary meaning as of the date of registration.") for Summ. See Stephen W. Boney, 127 F.3d at 827 (holding that case was not exceptional notwithstanding grant of summary judgment); CG Roxanne LLC v. Fiji Water Co. LLC, No. 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. The case did not settle (Date Filed: 1/13/2010). See Au-Tomotive Gold, Inc. v. Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 457 F.3d 1062, 1076 (9th Cir.2006). Docket Summons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. A.) With regard to the need test, the court noted that given the remoteness of the association between "collection" and a shopping center, "a competing shopping *1115 center would not need to use the term `collection' in order to identify its own shopping center." Astra Pharm. Save 25% on a pre-paid one year subscription. Service marks and trademarks are governed by identical standards." Chance v. Pac-Tel Teletrac Inc., 242 F.3d 1151, 1156 (9th Cir.2001). AMENDED ORDER re 91 Order. All that Mr. Conway could state was that he raised the issue with them; beyond that vague recollection, however, Mr. Conway unequivocally stated that he could not remember what he discussed with them specifically. None of the remaining evidence to which Plaintiff has interposed objections is necessary to adjudicate the instant motion. 4.) 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. 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. 636(b)(1)(B), (C); Fed.R.Civ.P. "Exceptional circumstances can be found when the non-prevailing party's case is groundless, unreasonable, vexatious, or pursued in bad faith." Executive Compensation has grown increasingly complicated. 64. In Support Of Motion To Compel Arbitration; As To Parties: removed. (Davidson's Reply Decl. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case. K.) Where the market is inundated by products using the particular trademarked word, there is a corresponding likelihood that consumers "will not likely be confused by any two in the crowd." Id. Messrs. Sandell and Hill selected the name "Sand Hill" by combining the first four letters of Mr. Sandell's last name with Mr. Hill's last name. YIDA GAO, ET AL. Struck (Defendant); As to: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); Shima Capitol LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (Cross-Defendant) et al. at 970. The parties, through counsel, appeared for argument on the motion on January 12, 2010. "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." %%EOF But, advertising, standing alone, does not establish secondary meaning. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2009) Modified on 11/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Factual disputes are genuine if they "properly can be resolved in favor of either party." 41, Filing As noted, a descriptive mark cannot be registered with the PTO absent a showing of secondary meaning. 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. (McCaffrey Depo. startxref 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. (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). 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 Unlike Plaintiff, Defendant does not provide any advice to any third party, and has no involvement in providing wealth management services. See One Indus., LLC v. Jim O'Neal Distrib., Inc., 578 F.3d 1154, 1164 (9th Cir.2009) ("When similar marks permeate the marketplace, the strength of the mark decreases. *** EXHIBITS re 48 Declaration Rachel R. Davidson in Support, CORRECTION OF DOCKET #[48-3] filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. But it also presents new risks to manage. Only admissible evidence may be considered in ruling on a motion for motion for summary judgment. VIA TELEPHONE. at 1218. ***Civil Case Terminated. F, Hill Depo. "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."). (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2010) Modified on 2/18/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). However, the issue was not as simple as Defendant now purports it to be. 15-20, Dkt. No one has written a summary of this case yet. [2] "[T]he only difference between a trademark and a service mark is that a trademark identifies goods while a service mark identifies services. All but one of the Sleekcraft factors strongly favor Defendant, and none favor Plaintiff. Defendant is a California limited liability company located in Los Altos, California, formed by business partners Bert Sandell and Albert Hill, Jr. Messrs. Sandell and Hill filed their Limited Liability Company Articles of Organization with the California Secretary of State on April 27, 1999. The record shows that over the course of the last ten years since Defendant began using the "Sand Hill Advisors" name, it has received only five or six telephone calls and one package intended for Plaintiff. 10 22 Sand Hill Global Advisors 650-854-9150 Visit Site add_a_photo Overall info 5.0 Year Registered 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. (Entered: 01/05/2009), ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Co., Inc., 870 F.2d 512, 517 (9th Cir. (Entered: 12/28/2009), *** FILED IN ERROR. Stated simply, it is not. 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. 2753. at 249-50, 106 S.Ct. (Id. Co., 704 F.2d 1575, 1577 (Fed.Cir.1983) (common use of "DRC" mark not likely to cause confusion where products were "quite distinct"). The amount of protection accorded to a particular mark is a function of its distinctiveness. ), 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. Def. 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. Nearly two years after its last loan, the Paycheck Protection Program is still making headlines for all the wrong reasons, unfortunately. Motion Hearing set for 2/23/2010 01:00 PM in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Oakland. As the Court explained in its summary judgment ruling, the amount of protection accorded to a particular mark is a function of its distinctiveness. Here, there is scant evidence of actual confusion, which weighs in favor of Defendant. 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. at 1219. (Counsel did not present papers as required by Civil L.R. DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case. Yet, there is no evidence to support Plaintiff's assertion that "Sand Hill" evokes an "entrepreneurial" spirit. Id. The plaintiffs in this case, the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians and its representative Ronald S. Holloway (collectively, "plaintiffs"), seek redress for the alleged conversion and misappropriation of (Dhillon, Jas) (Filed on 1/29/2009) Modified on 1/30/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). In that case, plaintiff Rodeo Collection, Inc., held several registered services marks for the mark "Rodeo Collection," which it used in connection with providing shopping center services. In June 1982, CLW Financial Services, Inc., became known as Conway, Luongo, Williams, Inc. (Id. WebSand Hill Advisors LLC. (Davidson Reply Decl. Where no "rational trier of fact" could find that a likelihood of confusion is "probable," the Court may grant summary judgment for the party accused of infringement.