This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Business Law
Trademark Infringement
Franchise

Baskin-Robbins USA Co. v. Oceana Catering Services Inc., dba M&M Dining Services, Sam Miller, Lisa Miller

Published: Oct. 19, 2000 | Result Date: Apr. 15, 2000 |

Case number: 00CV360EJFS Bench Decision –  $0

Judge

William B. Enright

Court

USDC Southern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Anita Gruettke

Stuart P. Jasper


Defendant

Timothy P. Kindelan

Todd J. Eastman


Facts

According to the plaintiff: Ice cream and frozen yogurt franchisor Baskin-Robbins brought an action for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act against its franchisee and against the operator of the dining center at Callaway Golf Company. Baskin-Robbins alleged that the franchisee, which operated franchises in Escondido, Ramona and Poway, had supplied Baskin-Robbins trademarked frozen yogurt mix without authorization at Ely's Place, the Callaway corporate dining center in Carlsbad. Baskin-Robbins terminated the franchise agreements and alleged violations of the Lanham Act and the franchise agreements by unauthorized use of the marks, by making unauthorized, off-site sales, and by failing to report sales and pay royalties. The franchisee initially contended that the sales were approved and that the franchisee would book the income when received. Later, the franchisee contended that it had donated the product as a promotion, had not received any payment, and therefore, was excused from reporting sales or paying royalties. The franchisee further contended that the failure to book a non-income producing sale was a technical, curable default which did not warrant termination of the franchisee agreements and was punitive. The franchisor offered evidence that the sales were unauthorized, that the duty to report sales and pay royalties accrued upon the transfer of the goods, but that, in any event, the franchisee had sought payment from the dining center and concealed the transactions by not issuing invoices. The court granted a preliminary injunction, terminating the right of the franchisee to do business as a Baskin-Robbins franchisee at any location. A permanent injunction was stipulated to by the dining center operator.

Settlement Discussions

The franchisor had demanded that the franchisee voluntarily cease business as a Baskin-Robbins franchisee. The franchisee declined.


#126797

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390