BD Performing Arts v. B.A.C. Musical Instruments, LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 7, 20224:22-cv-02050California1,127 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS

18 Plaintiff, BD Performing Arts (“Plaintiff”), filed its initial complaint on March 30, 2022. 19 It alleges that by making and selling instruments bearing Plaintiff’s “System Blue” trademark, 20 Defendants violated, inter alia, the Lanham Act, the Tariff Act, and California’s Unfair 21 Competition Law. On April 4, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order. 22 The Court denied that motion, without prejudice, on April 25, 2022. The relevant facts underlying 23 this dispute are set forth in that Order, and the Court will not repeat them in detail here. (See Dkt. 24 No. 43, “Order” at 1:20-4:18.) 25 The facts relevant to the current motion pertain to a Distribution and Marketing Services

27 Defendant Tianjin Jinbao Musical Instruments Co., Ltd. (“Jinbao”), a Chinese corporation, Agreement (“DMSA”) that Plaintiff’s former subsidiary, Azulo, Inc. (“Azulo”), entered into with the Defendants. The DMSA contains a forum selection that provides that “[a]ny dispute regarding this Agreement shall be brought in the District Court of Johnson County, Kansas, or the Federal Court located in Kansas City, Kansas.” (Dkt.…

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.