Globalaw Limited v. Carmon & Carmon Law Office et al

District of Columbia, dcd-1:2003-cv-00950

ORDER GRANTING {{171}} Counterclaim Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment as to all counts contained within C&C's Counterclaim; DENYING 181 C&C's Motion for Further Discovery Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f); DENYING {{183}} C&C's Motion to Reconsider the November 14, 2005 Opinion and Order of Magistrate Judge Alan Kay; DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT Counterclaim Defendants' Objections and Motion to Strike Evidence Submitted in Support of C&C's R esponse to Counterclaim Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment; DENYING AS MOOT {{197}} Counterclaim Defendants' Motion to Stay Related Case because this ruling effectively decides Counterclaim Defendants' potential liability prior to a ny court action in C&C's new case against third-party Dennis Campbell; and DENYING AS MOOT {{199}} C&C's Motion to Consolidate this case with Carmon & Carmon v. Dennis Campbell, Civ. A. No. 06-769 (CKK). FURTHER ORDERING that (1) given the co ntours of the Court's ruling, i.e., that "GLOBALAW" is a generic term or is (at best) descriptive with no secondary meaning and no likelihood of confusion, and (2) given the general thrust of Counterclaim Defendants' own evidence and argument, it is reasonable to question whether Counterclaim Defendant/original Plaintiff GLOBALAW Limited can continue to insist that it has a protectable interest in the mark. By September 25, 2006, GLOBALAW Limited is to provide the Court with a report that either shows cause why this case should not be completely dismissed in light of this Court's ruling or accedes to the dismissal of this action in its entirety. Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on September 11, 2006. (lcckk2)

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA GLOBALAW LIMITED, Plaintiff, v. CARMON & CARMON LAW OFFICE and GLOBALAW, INC., Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 03-950 (CKK) v. GLOBALAW LIMITED, BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP, JACKSON WALKER L.L.P., and GARVEY SCHUBERT BARER, Counterclaim Defenndants. ORDER For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is, this 11th day of September, 2006, hereby ORDERED that [171] Counterclaim Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to all counts contained within C&C's Counterclaim; it is further ORDERED that [181] C&C's Motion for Further Discovery Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f) is DENIED; it is further ORDERED that [183] C&C's Motion to Reconsider the November 14, 2005 Opinion and Order of Magistrate Judge Alan Kay is DENIED; it is further ORDERED that Counterclaim Defendants' Objections and Motion to Strike Evidence Submitted in Support of C&C's Response to Counterclaim Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as MOOT; it is further ORDERED that because this ruling effectively decides Counterclaim Defendants' potential liability prior to any court action in C&C's new action against third-party Dennis Campbell, [197] Counterclaim Defendants' Motion to Stay Related Case must be DENIED AS MOOT; it is further ORDERED that because C&C's Counterclaim is wholly without merit, and is now dismissed, there is no need to consolidate this case with C&C's action against Dennis Campbell; accordingly, [199] C&C's Motion to Consolidate this case with Carmon & Carmon v. Dennis Campbell, Civ. A. No. 06-769 (CKK) is DENIED AS MOOT; it is further ORDERED that (1) given the contours of the Court's ruling, i.e., that "GLOBALAW" is a generic term or is – at best – descriptive with no secondary meaning and no likelihood of confusion, and (2) given the general thrust of Counterclaim Defendants' own evidence and argument, it is reasonable to question whether Counterclaim Defendant/original Plaintiff GLOBALAW Limited can continue to insist that it has a protectable interest in the mark. See Compl. ¶¶ 19-20. By September 25, 2006, GLOBALAW Limited is to provide the Court with a report that either shows cause why this case should not be completely dismissed in light of this Court's ruling or accedes to the dismissal of this action in its entirety. SO ORDERED. /s/ COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY United States District Judge