Lindora, LLC v. Isagenix International, LLC

Good Law
198 F. Supp. 3d 1127·2016 WL 4077712·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100413
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 1, 2016Case No. 15-cv-2754-BAS-RBBCalifornia11,552 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Honbashant, J.

OPINION AND ORDER

This action arises from Defendant Isage-nix International, LLC’s (“Isagenix”) and Defendant Ella Novokolsky’s (“Novokol-sky”) alleged use of Plaintiff Lindora, LLC’s (“Lindora”) “Lean for Life” marks. Before the Court is Isagenix’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue or, alternatively, to sever the claims against Isagenix and transfer those claims to the District of *1133 Arizona. (ECF No. 13.) Lindora opposes. (ECF No. 18.)

The Court finds the motion suitable for disposition on the papers submitted and without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7.1(d)(1). For the reasons explained below, the Court DENIES Isagenix’s motion.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Lindora is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Costa Mesa, California. (First Am. Compl. (“FAC”) ¶1.) Lindora develops, markets, and sells weight management goods and services, including meal replacement shakes, protein bars, and diet planning services. (Id. ¶¶ 18, 19.) Since at least 1989, Lindora has used the marks “Lean for Life!” and “Lean for Life” (collectively, the “Lindora Marks”) to promote and sell its products. (Id. ¶ 14.) Lindora…

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.