Beats Electronics, LLC v. Deng

Beats Electronics, LLC v. Deng

Plaintiff:	Beats Electronics, LLC
Defendant:	Quanfu Deng
Case Number:	2:2014cv01077
Filed:	April 30, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Sacramento
Presiding Judge:	Dale A. Drozd
Presiding Judge:	John A. Mendez
Nature of Suit:	Trademark
Cause of Action:	15 U.S.C. § 1125
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
January 28, 2016	Filing 21 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/28/2016 RECOMMENDING that the 13 Motion for Default Judgment renoticed at ECF 15 be granted in part; RECOMMENDING that the court enter judgment against the defendant on t he complaint's claims of violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114, 15 U.S.C. § 1125, California Business and Professions Code § 17200, et seq., and common law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition; RECOMMENDING that the court award s tatutory damages to the plaintiff in the amount of $10,000.00 pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1117; RECOMMENDING that the court enjoin the defendant, and all persons acting by, through, or in concert with the defendant, from using the plaintiff' ;s trademarks in any manner; RECOMMENDING that the court deny the plaintiff's request for attorney's fees and costs without prejudice to renewal; RECOMMENDING that this case be closed; REFERRING this matter to District Judge John A. Mendez; ORDERING that any objections be filed and served within fourteen days after service of these Findings and Recommendations. (Michel, G.)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 28, 2016

Filing 21 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/28/2016 RECOMMENDING that the 13 Motion for Default Judgment renoticed at ECF 15 be granted in part; RECOMMENDING that the court enter judgment against the defendant on t he complaint's claims of violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114, 15 U.S.C. § 1125, California Business and Professions Code § 17200, et seq., and common law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition; RECOMMENDING that the court award s tatutory damages to the plaintiff in the amount of $10,000.00 pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1117; RECOMMENDING that the court enjoin the defendant, and all persons acting by, through, or in concert with the defendant, from using the plaintiff' ;s trademarks in any manner; RECOMMENDING that the court deny the plaintiff's request for attorney's fees and costs without prejudice to renewal; RECOMMENDING that this case be closed; REFERRING this matter to District Judge John A. Mendez; ORDERING that any objections be filed and served within fourteen days after service of these Findings and Recommendations. (Michel, G.)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Beats Electronics, LLC v. Deng
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Beats Electronics, LLC
Represented By:	Brent Herbert Blakely
Represented By:	Michael Paul Marchand
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Quanfu Deng
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?