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.

Intellectual Property
Trademark Infringement
Unfair Competition

3M Company v. RX2Live LLC, RX2Live Inc.

Published: Aug. 27, 2021 | Result Date: Aug. 2, 2021 | Filing Date: Apr. 10, 2020 |

Case number: 1:20-cv-00523-NONE-SAB Bench Decision –  Injunctive Relief

Judge

Dale A. Drozd

Court

USDC Eastern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Carmine R. Zarlenga
(Mayer Brown LLP)

Dale J. Giali
(King & Spalding LLP)

Jillian Joseph
(Mayer Brown LLP)


Defendant

Lloyd M. Eisenberg
(Eisenberg & Carton)


Facts

Throughout its history, the 3M Company (3M), has been providing state-of-art, industry-leading scientific and medical products to consumers throughout the world under its famous 3M marks. Specifically, 3M provided healthcare products and personal protective equipment such as its 3M-brand N95 respirators to healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. An employee of Rx2Live contacted Community Medical Centers (CMC) via email to advertise PPE products available through Rx2Live, including purported 3M-brand N95 respirators. The employee presented a PowerPoint presentation advertising the availability of 3M products with grossly inflated prices. However, Rx2Live has never been an authorized distributor of 3M products and had no rights to use 3M's marks. 3M brought an action against Rx2Live for trademark infringement, unfair competition, false endorsement, false association, false designation of origin, trademark dilution under the Lanham Act, and false advertising under the Lanham Act.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended defendant wrongly used its famous trademarks to perpetuate a false and deceptive price-gouging scheme on unwitting customers and consumers, including CMC, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Plaintiff contended defendant attempted to take advantage of healthcare workers, first responders, and others by using the fame of the 3M brand and marks. Plaintiff contended defendant confused and deceived consumers in California by offering for purchase products at unconscionably high prices that were approximately 4-5 times above 3M's list prices.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all of the contentions.

Result

The parties agreed defendant will be permanently enjoined from: holding itself to having affiliation or connection with 3M and/or any authorized distributor of 3M; using 3M's trademarks and/or logos in correspondence or other offers of solicitation related to Personal Protective Equipment; from representing any pricing information for 3M brand N95 respirators; from offering to sell or selling any 3M products; from acquiring any 3M product for purposes of resale; and make a payment to 3M in the amount of $750.00 which 3M shall donate to a nonprofit organization focusing on COVID-19 relief.


#137620

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

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