Bobosky et al v. adidas AG et al
| W. Brand Bobosky and We Not Me, Ltd. |
| 180LA, LLC, Banner Seventeen LLC, Boston Celtics, L.P., Kevin Garnett, NBA Media Ventures LLC, NBA Properties, Inc., NBA Services, Inc., NBA Store LLC, NBA Store, Inc., adidas AG and adidas America, Inc. |
| 3:2010cv00630 |
| June 3, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland Office |
| Paul Papak |
| Copyright |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Trademark |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
181
OPINION & ORDER: Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 138 ). Although Bobosky's federal trademark registrations are void ab initio, there remains a genuine issue of material fact concerning whether Bobosky has established valid rights in WE NOT ME as an unregistered trademark through use of the mark on shirts and hats to identify their secondary source. Signed on 12/29/11 by Magistrate Judge Paul Papak. (gm)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER - Defendants' Motions to Dismiss 20 , 35 & 67 are granted as to plaintiffs' declaratory judgment claims and denied as to plaintiffs' remaining claims. Plaintiffs may file a Third Amended Complaint stating facts as to their declaratory judgment claim. Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss or Transfer Venue 69 is denied. Signed on 11/18/2010 by Judge Garr M. King. (mja)
|
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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
