ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Seattle Trademark Lawyer

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Intellectual Property Law

: Seattle Trademark Lawyer

Prosecute Your Case or Risk Being Sanctioned

By Michael Atkins

ADVERTISEMENTS

If you want to go to trial, you’d better prosecute your case.

That’s what the magistrate judge told the plaintiff last week in Guru Denim, Inc. v. Hayes, a counterfeiting case in the Central District of California.

Plaintiff sued defendant, then pretty much stopped participating in the case. This irked the court, particularly when the plaintiff asked for a continuance during the pretrial conference based on the defendant’s failure to provide discovery — which plaintiff had never before complained about.

“Plaintiff has repeatedly displayed dilatory conduct throughout this litigation,” the court found. “Plaintiff made no effort to prosecute this case for nearly sixteen months after filing the Complaint. Plaintiff made no effort to seek a Court order to compel Defendant to comply with Plaintiff’s purported discovery requests. Plaintiff made no effort to seek a continuance from the Court prior to the Pretrial Conference.

“Plaintiff’s conduct, far from being benign, has violated a multitude of provisions of this District’s Local Rules and this Court’s Orders. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require an attorney to be prepared for pretrial conferences. Plaintiff’s counsel was substantially unprepared for the April 26, 2010 Pretrial Conference. When asked about the merits of Defendant’s defense — namely, that Defendant asserts he obtained the goods from Jet Apparel — Plaintiff’s counsel admitted that the was utterly clueless about his client’s interactions with Jet Apparel. It appears that Plaintiff’s counsel has not even conducted the most basic inquiry into the potential factual disputes that were to be tried eight days later.”

For these reasons, the court ordered the plaintiff to show cause why it should not be sanctioned, including monetary fines, exclusion of evidence, and dismissal of its complaint. The court said it would wait to read plaintiff’s submission before deciding if and when the case will proceed to trial.

The case cite is Guru Denim, Inc. v. Hayes, 2010 WL 1734925, No. 08-4493 (C.D. Calif. April 28, 2010).

Full post as published by Seattle Trademark Lawyer on May 05, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.002 secs (from cache 11/03/26 09:53:58)