Yost

Committee for Idaho's High Desert, Inc. v. Yost

Good Law
92 F.3d 814·1996 WL 438899
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 6, 1996Nos. 95-35439, 95-35472California6,466 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

James Yost, Ted Hoffman, Quey Johns, and their corporation Committee for Idaho’s High Desert, Inc. (hereinafter “appellants”) appeal from the district court’s decision, published at 881 F.Supp. 1457 , finding that they violated § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051-1128 , by infringing appellee’s protected tradename “Committee for Idaho’s High Desert” and enjoining them from using that name. 1 The Committee for Idaho’s *817 High Desert, Ine. (CIHD, pronounced “kid”) cross-appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing its damages claim and its claims against the individual appellants, as well as from the court’s order denying an extension of time in which to file a motion for attorney’s fees. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

CIHD is a non-profit environmental education and advocacy organization, concerned with issues of grazing, range-land reform, water use, recreation, endangered species, and resource use affecting the desert of southwest Idaho and parts of Nevada, Oregon, and Utah. CIHD’s position on these issues is “to encourage limited use of public lands with an emphasis on conservation…

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.