Monster Energy Company v. BeastUp LLC
Published: Feb. 17, 2023 | Result Date: Nov. 14, 2022 | Filing Date: Aug. 2, 2017 |Case number: 2:17-cv-01605-KJM-JDP Bench Verdict – Plaintiff
Judge
Court
USDC Eastern District of California
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Marko R. Zoretic
(Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP)
Matthew S. Bellinger
(Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP)
Steven J. Nataupsky
(Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP)
Jason A. Champion
(Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP)
Lynda J. Zadra-Symes
(Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP)
Defendant
Anderson J. Duff
(Duff Law PLLC)
Eve J. Hogan
( Public Consulting Group)
Facts
Monster Energy Company brought an action against BeastUp, LLC.
Monster launched its original Monster Energy drink in 2002. Since 2002, the Monster Energy drink has displayed both its "Claw Icon" and UNLEASHES THE BEAST! marks on the container. Monster has expanded its line of energy drinks to include other energy drink products, all of which display the Claw Icon on the product containers. The vast majority of the line of Monster energy drinks also display at least one mark containing BEAST on the product containers. Monster owns numerous U.S. trademark registrations for its Claw Icon mark and Beast-containing marks in connection with beverages and other goods and services.
In May 2014, BeastUp began selling its BeastUP energy drink. The BeastUp energy drink container displayed the BEASTUP mark on the front of the product container. The container also displayed the BeastUp Logo, which was a red and black jagged logo with talon-like features beneath the BEASTUP name. The container also displayed two sets of silver claw or scratch marks near the top and bottom of each can. BeastUp was the owner of a U.S. trademark registration covering the mark BEASTUP in connection with "sports drinks, namely, energy drinks."
The court previously determined that Monster had a protectable interest in its BEAST-containing marks and its Claw Icon Mark.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff asserted claims for trademark infringement and false designation of origin under 15 U.S.C. Section 1125(a); trademark infringement under U.S.C. Section 1114; Trademark dilution under Section 1125(c); petition for cancelation of defendant's U.S. trademark registration; unfair competition under the California Business and Professions Code; and unfair competition under California common law.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all contentions. Defendant pointed out a number of differences between its marks and Monster's marks, including the prominence of the BEASTUP name on BeastUp's cans and differences between the BeastUp Logo and the Claw Icon mark.
Result
After a bench trial, the court entered final judgment in favor of Monster on all claims.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390