At & T CORP. v. Vision One Security Systems

Good Law
914 F. Supp. 392·1995 WL 791071·1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20769
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 15, 199595-0565-IEG (BTM)California3,638 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gonzalez, J.

ORDER GRANTING AT & T’S MOTION TO STAY; GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR TRIAL PREFERENCE; SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE, PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, AND TRIAL DATES [DOC. ## 34, 40]

Plaintiff AT & T Corporation’s motion to dismiss or stay counterclaims pending arbitration and defendants Vision One, William F. Woods, Daniel M. Rohrbassen, and Paul Siegel’s motion for trial preference came on regularly for hearing on August 14, 1995 before the Honorable Irma E. Gonzalez. James J. Mittermiller of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton appeared on behalf of plaintiff; Matthew V. Herron of Meisenheimer & Herron appeared on behalf of defendants.

BACKGROUND

On April 28, 1995, plaintiff AT & T Corporation (“AT & T”) filed a complaint for damages and injunctive relief against defendants Vision One Security Systems, a California general partnership, William F. Woods, Daniel M. Rohrbassen, and Paul Siegel (collectively referred to as “defendants” or “Vision One”). AT & T claims that Vision One’s license to use AT & T’s trade name and trademarks has been terminated; nonetheless, Vision One continues to hold itself out as an authorized AT & T dealer and use the name and marks in its advertising,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.