Entrepreneur Media v. Smith
The district court, inter alia, granted summary judgment to plaintiff publisher on trademark infringement and unfair competition claims. It awarded $337,280 in damages and enjoined defendant publisher from using any marks confusingly similar to “Entrepreneur.” On appeal, addressing the trademark infringement claim, the court applied the Sleekcraft analysis and affirmed on the question of whether defendant publisher infringed the trademark by his use of a mark on the cover of a publication. The court reached this result because of the strong visual similarity of the marks and because of evidence demonstrating defendant publisher’s intent to deceive.
In Re: Strunk
The only dispute before the court was whether competent evidence demonstrated probable cause that the fugitive was involved in the victim’s murder. The most pertinent evidence linking the fugitive to the murder was a witness’s confession to Philippine police that the fugitive had hired him to commit the murder. The witness’s family was paid by Philippine government authorities in consideration for the confession, which the witness later recanted in open court. The confession, as well as the other evidence submitted by the Philippine government concerning the fugitive’s participation in the murder, was so inconsistent and conflicting that it provided little competent evidence to support the conclusion that the fugitive hired the witness to murder the victim.
People v. Pinedo
A previously filed felony complaint had alleged a theft by embezzlement occurring more than four years earlier. Before the preliminary hearing, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. The magistrate dismissed the complaint on the due process ground of unreasonable preaccusation delay. The prosecution did not seek appellate review of that order but again filed the charge of theft by embezzlement in a new felony complaint. Defendant moved to dismiss, contending that the magistrate’s prior order precluded all further prosecution. The magistrate, in granting dismissal, pointed out that the prosecution had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the due process issue prior to the initial dismissal.
People v. Dyke
A jury found defendant guilty of sending or exhibiting harmful matter to a minor and misdemeanor sexual battery. The Court of Appeal reversed the conviction for sending or exhibiting harmful matter to a minor and remanded for resentencing.
Yellow Cab Co. of Sacramento v. Yellow Cab Co. of Elk Grove, Inc.
Plaintiff Yellow Cab Company of Sacramento brings this action against Yellow Cab Company of Elk Grove and Michael P. Steiner alleging claims for relief for violations of the Lanham Act, common law trademark infringement and unfair competition, statutory unfair competition, false advertising, and intentional interference with prospective business advantage. This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s and defendants’ separate motions for summary judgment.