Duncan v. Stuetzle

Good Law
76 F.3d 1480·96 Daily Journal DAR 1921·37 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1758·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 2584·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1125
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 21, 199694-55598California6,443 words

Opinion

Opinion

76 F.3d 1480 37 U.S.P.Q.2d 1758 , 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1125 , 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 1921 Nancy DUNCAN, individually and d/b/a "Footsie Wootsie Machine Rentals"; Just Vibrations International, Inc., a California corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Al STUETZLE; Lexington Scenery & Props, a California corporation; Ken Acton; Amuze, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-55598. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 19, 1995. Decided Feb. 21, 1996. Andrew N. Chang, Kelly, Herlihy & Bane, San Francisco, California, for plaintiffs-appellants. Steven J. Adamski, Esner, Higa & Chang, San Francisco, California, for defendants-appellees. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Manuel L. Real, Chief Judge, Presiding. Before: POOLE, BOOCHEVER, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge: 1 In this fifth round of litigation over rights to a foot massage device, we explore the boundaries of state and federal jurisdiction over trademark infringement.I 2 Nancy Duncan, and her company, Just Vibrations International, Inc., produce and distribute "Footsie Wootsie" foot massage machines…

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.