Closed Loop Marketing, Inc. v. Closed Loop Marketing, LLC

Good Law
589 F. Supp. 2d 1211·2008 WL 5170567·89 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1782·2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92222
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 13, 2008CIV. S-08-1500 LKK/DADCalifornia3,898 words

Opinion

Opinion

Karlton, J.

ORDER

Plaintiff and defendant are both companies engaged in the business of, inter alia, internet marketing consulting and advertising consulting. At the time this action was filed, plaintiff and defendant both operated under the name “Closed Loop Marketing,” although defendant argues that it has since adopted the name “CLM.” Plaintiff brings this action alleging that it has a protectable interest in the trade name Closed Loop Marketing, and that defen dant has infringed upon this interest and diluted the name.

Before the court are two motions: plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction and defendant’s motion to dismiss. Both motions call upon the court to determine essentially the same issues. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted. Plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction is therefore denied.

I. FACTS

A) Evidentiary Issues

This case has not progressed beyond the filing of pre-answer motions, yet the parties have already submitted well over three hundred pages of exhibits and declarations. Many of these submissions are “capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned,”…

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.