WBS, Inc. v. Juan Croucier

I. Background

27 The facts of this case are set forth in great detail in this 28 1 court’s prior orders. In short, Plaintiff asserted that in 1997, 2 a partnership that owned trademarks associated with the rock band 3 RATT 4 assigned its rights in the marks to Plaintiff. Plaintiff brought 5 trademark infringement claims in this Court against Defendants and 6 Defendant Croucier filed a counterclaim against Plaintiff. 7 Croucier and Plaintiff brought cross-motions for summary 8 judgment on Plaintiffs’ infringement claims. This Court denied 9 Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted Croucier’s 10 motion, concluding that the evidence established beyond dispute 11 that the supposed 1997 assignment of the trademarks to Plaintiff 12 was invalid. Plaintiff sought reconsideration of the court’s 13 order, arguing, among other things, that Croucier was collaterally 14 estopped and barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine from challenging 15 the validity of the assignment of the marks to Plaintiff. The 16 court denied Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration without 17 considering the merits of Plaintiff’s collateral estoppel argument, 18 observing that…