Plaintiff's argument is unpersuasive. M2 Software, Inc. v. Madacy, 421 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir.2005). And the best part of all, documents in their CrowdSourced Library are FREE! Struck (Defendant); Struck Capital Id. 0000000940 00000 n J. at 16-17, Dkt. for Summ. (Id. Sand Hill Advisors 42. Having reviewed the motion papers submitted and considered *1110 the arguments of counsel in connection with this matter, the Court GRANTS the motion for the reasons set forth below. Yet, there is no evidence to support Plaintiff's assertion that "Sand Hill" evokes an "entrepreneurial" spirit. No one has written a summary of this case yet. Sand Hill Property Company buys 'Four Corners' property The Court thus finds that this factor favors Defendant. "Marks are often classified in categories of generally increasing distinctiveness; . Years later, certain members of Plaintiff's management sought to reacquire their equity stake from Boston Private, which prompted Plaintiff to reorganize as a Delaware limited liability company. at 207:11-19.) (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2009) Modified on 11/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). at 8-9. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/20/2010) Modified on 9/21/2010 (kc, COURT STAFF). 1052(f). DocketStatus Conference re: Arbitration scheduled for 08/29/2023 at 08:30 AM in Santa Monica Courthouse at Department R, DocketPursuant to the request of plaintiff, Status Conference re: Arbitration scheduled for 10/04/2022 at 08:30 AM in Santa Monica Courthouse at Department R Held - Continued was rescheduled to 08/29/2023 08:30 AM, DocketMinute Order (Status Conference re: Arbitration), DocketUpdated -- Declaration Of Frank D. Rorie JR. We worked in that area. 's Opp'n to Def. Sand Hill Advisors LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors LLC See Report and Recommendation Re: Def. Id. 3-5.) See Order of Reference, Dkt. (Davidson Decl. (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/22/2009) Modified on 12/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Sign up or sign in to contribute one. 88, Filing In Sand Hill Advisors, LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors, LLC a trademark case involving companies with the same name the Northern District of California found that northern California is big enough for both parties. at 50:10-52:14.) "The two tests are related because `[t]he more imagination that is required to associate a mark with a product [or service,] the less likely the words used will be needed by competitors to describe their products [or services].'" "); Williams Depo. United States District Court, N.D. California, Oakland Division. 56(e); Orr v. Bank of Am., 285 F.3d 764, 773 (9th Cir. 0000001069 00000 n IAPD - Investment Adviser Public Disclosure - Homepage In addition, Defendant ignores the evidence proffered by Plaintiff, and cited by the Magistrate, that Plaintiff desired to protect the goodwill that it believed it had established by operating under the Sand Hill Advisors name. Bank groups say the focus on capital rules in Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michael Barr's report on Silicon Valley Bank are misguided. The district court must review de novo "those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/19/2009) (Entered: 02/19/2009), Minute Entry: Initial Case Management Conference held on 2/18/2009 before Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong. 2007). Case No: C 08-5016 Def. Lahoti v. VeriCheck, Inc., 586 F.3d 1190, 1196 (9th Cir.2009). Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System. ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong GRANTING 36 Motion for Summary Judgment. That leaves "descriptive" marks, which are not considered inherently distinctive because *1113 they define a particular characteristic of a product in a way that does not require any exercise of the imagination. Ex. Id. . In Support Of Motion To Compel Arbitration: Name Extension changed from OF FRANK D. RORIE JR. In opposing Defendant's summary judgment motion, Plaintiff argued that the presumption applied because it allegedly has been using the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark exclusively and continuously since March 29, 1995, and that Defendant did not begin using the mark until 2005, which more than five years after Plaintiff's date of first use. Only admissible evidence may be considered in ruling on a motion for motion for summary judgment. Motion Hearing set for 2/23/2010 01:00 PM in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Oakland. Ex. But, advertising, standing alone, does not establish secondary meaning. 's Mot. Sand Hill Advisors LLC: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re {{61}} MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC Objections to R&R due by 6/15/2010. (Id. (af, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/25/2009) (Entered: 02/25/2009), ORDER RE DISCOVERY PROCEDURES - Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte, on 2/24/09. WebThe Michigan Supreme Court is providing the information on this website as a public service. 9.) for Idaho's High Desert, Inc. v. Yost, 92 F.3d 814, 821 (9th Cir.1996). (Entered: 12/11/2009), OBJECTIONS to 38 Declaration of Albert R. Hill in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. The Court concludes that the services are unrelated, and this factor weighs in favor of the Defendant. See Brookfield Commc'ns, 174 F.3d at 1056 (likelihood of confusion resulting from the use of the same or similar mark was "remote" if the parties "did not compete" with one another); Dynamics Research Corp. v. Langenau Mfg. (Entered: 12/11/2009), Declaration of Jane Williams in Support of 42 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. endstream endobj 34 0 obj<> endobj 35 0 obj<> endobj 36 0 obj<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]/ExtGState<>>> endobj 37 0 obj<> endobj 38 0 obj<> endobj 39 0 obj[/ICCBased 46 0 R] endobj 40 0 obj<> endobj 41 0 obj<> endobj 42 0 obj<> endobj 43 0 obj<>stream Applied Info Sciences Corp., 511 F.3d at 969-970. at 212:7-10. C-07-02258 RMW, 2008 WL 4542803 at *2 (N.D. Cal. Get A.M.business scoops. L.R. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case. (Entered: 01/12/2010), EXHIBIT C re 48 Declaration of Rachel R. Davidson in Support, CORRECTION OF DOCKET # 50 filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. In or about 2000, Boston Private Financial Holdings ("Boston Private") acquired a financial interest in Plaintiff. Stated simply, it is not. The Court therefore addresses each prong of the test for service mark infringement to ascertain whether summary judgment is appropriate based on the record presented. Operating Status Active. At his deposition, Mr. Hill testified that he made an effort to determine whether the domain name www.sandhill advisors.com was available, but denied using an internet search engine such as Google to ascertain whether another company already was using the name "Sand Hill Advisors." 1:23-MC-00086 | 2023-02-15, California Courts Of Appeal | Other | The similarity of the marks, proximity of the goods or service and marketing channels used constitute "the controlling troika in the Sleekcraft analysis," GoTo.com, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co., 202 F.3d 1199, 1205 (9th Cir.2000), and are considered the most important, see Brookfield Commc'ns, Inc. v. W. Coast Entm't Corp., 174 F.3d 1036, 1055 n. 16 (9th Cir.1999). Defendant's business focuses on purchasing, holding, selling, managing and leasing commercial real estate in the San Francisco Bay Area solely for its own investment purposes. (Entered: 02/19/2009), CLERKS NOTICE Case Management Conference set for 2/18/2009 02:45 PM. Declaration of Albert R. Hill, Jr. in Support of 36 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed bySand Hill Advisors LLC. RELATED. %PDF-1.4 These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia. None of the remaining evidence to which Plaintiff has interposed objections is necessary to adjudicate the instant motion. Filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Nearly two years after its last loan, the Paycheck Protection Program is still making headlines for all the wrong reasons, unfortunately. VS ADAM B. See McSherry v. City of Long Beach, 584 F.3d 1129, 1138 (9th Cir.2009) ("Summary judgment requires facts, not simply unsupported denials or rank speculation"). Id. Cal. Last Updated January 6, 2019 at 8:27 PM EST (4.3 years ago). (McCaffrey Depo. Plaintiff admittedly has no expert survey to support its claim of secondary meaning, but instead, relies entirely on evidence that it used the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark in its marketing and advertising efforts. Ex. Japan Telecom, 287 F.3d at 873, 875 (affirming summary judgment for defendant where plaintiff's evidence was insufficient to show secondary meaning). To request information suppression, updates, or additions, contact us about this docket. To reflect this change, Plaintiff then sought to change its name from "Sand Hill Advisors, Inc." to "Sand Hill Advisors, LLC." J. Michael Keyes Defendant has since corrected this error by submitting a properly verified version of Mr. Hill's declaration. "However, such a broad inference is not sufficient to demonstrate that a genuine issue exists concerning likelihood of confusion as to the source of the products involved in the present suit." Legal Name Sand Hill Global Advisors, LLC. Plaintiff's assertion that the parties overlap in the area of real estate services paints with too broad a brush. (Davidson Reply Decl. "Secondary meaning can be established in many ways, including (but not limited to) direct consumer testimony; survey evidence; exclusivity, manner, and length of use of a mark; amount and manner of advertising; amount of sales and number of customers; established place in the market; and proof of intentional copying by the defendant." (Id. In addition, Plaintiff ignores that "[t] he question is whether the phrase can be construed to mean that the product is made in a certain locale." The Court of Appeal had rejected Sand Hill's claims against Wells Fargo related to a 2011 lawsuit, which alleged a foreclosure auction of the center was not properly held. The Ninth Circuit construes the "exceptional cases" requirement narrowly. at 47:2-73:8; Creighton Depo. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, 7/8/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF ADAM B. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION to Of Frank D. Rorie JR. "The `true test of secondary meaning' is the effectiveness of the advertising effort." Plaintiff summarily asserts that "there is no need for other wealth management firms to use `Sand Hill Advisors' in describing or advertising their services." 0000002351 00000 n 0000000913 00000 n Rather, the salient question for purposes of ascertaining whether a mark is descriptive is whether the mark conveys information regarding the nature of the goods or services. 2:23-MC-00075 | 2023-02-15, U.S. District Courts | Other | Because "Sand Hill Advisors" is descriptive, it is not entitled to protection unless it has acquired secondary meaning. Sleekcraft, 599 F.2d at 354. C they may be (1) generic; (2) descriptive; (3) suggestive; (4) arbitrary; or (5) fanciful." Plaintiff argues that "Advisors" requires imagination because it does not describe "wealth management" services in particular. Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. (Court Reporter: Not Reported) (jlsec, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/13/2010) Modified on 1/15/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). *1122 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket 36) is GRANTED. WebMike and his team have represented some of the worlds most recognized brands and companies in high-stakes litigation in numerous federal courts across the country including Washington, Oregon, California, Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, Utah, and Florida. at 13-18. Headquarters Regions San Francisco Bay Area, Silicon Valley, West Coast. Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 791 (9th Cir. Summons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); Sand Hill Advisors, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. 0000005059 00000 n Thus, the Court concludes that "Sand Hill Advisors" is primarily geographically descriptive. Clamp Mfg. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 4/22/2010. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 2/19/09. On November 4, 2008, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court, alleging a single claim for service mark infringement under the Lanham Act. Alliance for Open Soc. All that Mr. Conway could state was that he raised the issue with them; beyond that vague recollection, however, Mr. Conway unequivocally stated that he could not remember what he discussed with them specifically. Alternatively, the Court concluded that even if 2(f) were germane, Plaintiff had failed to demonstrate the requisite five years of exclusive and continuous use. Plaintiff attempts to analogize this case to Rodeo Collection, and argues that "Sand Hill Advisors" is suggestive, and not primarily geographically descriptive as claimed by Defendant. JUDGMENT entered in favor of Defendant Sand Hill Advisors, LLC. Eaton, Ingham, Hillsdale counties accused of illegally profiting "The Legislative History of the Lanham Act points out that where a logical connection can be made between the product and the geographical term, the term is geographically descriptive" Burke-Parsons-Bowlby Corp. v. Appalachian Log Homes, Inc., 871 F.2d 590, 595 (6th Cir.1989); e.g., In re Wada, 194 F.3d 1297, 1299-1300 (Fed.Cir.1999) (affirming PTO ruling that "New York Ways Gallery" was primarily geographically descriptive because "NEW YORK is not an obscure geographical term and that it is known as a place where the goods at issue here are designed, manufactured, and sold."). WebSand Hill: a California Financial Planning and Wealth Management Firm, 245 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA, 94301, United States (650) 854-9150 amy@select-advisors.com (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/15/2008) Modified on 12/16/2008 (cjl, COURT STAFF). Sand Hill Advisors, LLC - CourtListener.com The Articles of Registration identify Defendant's "[t]ype of business" as follows: "To engage in any lawful business for which limited liability companies may be organized in California including real estate activities, finance and advisory services." On January 12, 2010, the parties appeared through counsel for oral argument on the motion. (Conway Depo. 2753. REFER TO DOCUMENT 50 . Equally unpersuasive is Defendant's contention that Plaintiff had no basis upon which to rely on section 2(f) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. STRUCK'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, Opposition - OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT ADAM B. Seattle Trademark Lawyer J. (Related document(s) 48 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/23/2009) Modified on 12/28/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). (Date Filed: 2/18/2009). 91, Filing Sand Hill Advisors, LLC v. Sand Hill Advisors, LLC :: California PLEASE SEE DOCKET # 51 . ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong GRANTING 35 Ex Parte Motion to Move the Hearing Date for Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Setting Hearing on Motion For Summary Judgment to 1/12/2010 at 01:00 PM. at 249-50, 106 S.Ct. at 8-9. Summary. C.). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Related document(s) 47 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 12/22/2009) Modified on 12/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Entrepreneur Media, 279 F.3d at 1144. Signed by Mediator, James Gilliland, dated 5/19/2009. Plaintiff responds that in order to challenge its showing of a "substantially continuous" use of the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark, Defendant is required to show that it used the mark in advertising or in a manner that describes its services. ), Defendant is a California limited liability company formed by business partners Bert Sandell and Albert Hill, Jr., located in Los Altos, California. 57. Case Referred to Magistrate Judge for MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE to be held between 01/13/10 ant 01/22/10; Case Referred to Mediation. Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Sand Hill, which caters primarily to high-net-worth individuals in Northern California, has $900 million of assets under management. Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions. (Davidson Decl. STRUCK IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, 7/8/2021: Memorandum of Points & Authorities, 7/21/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF DENIS SHMIDT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS AND CROSS-DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT ADAM B. In October 1989, Conway, Luongo, Williams, Inc., changed its name to Conway, Williams & Foster, Inc. (Id. [2] Registration of a mark is prima facie evidence of its validity, as well as its owner's entitlement to use the mark exclusively as specified in the registration. 0000005571 00000 n After considering the motion on the papers submitted, the Magistrate issued a thorough, fourteen-page order in which she recommended denying Defendant's motion. Art Attacks Ink, LLC v. MGA Entm't Inc., 581 F.3d 1138, 1145 (9th Cir. 0000002907 00000 n DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk, U.S. District Courts | Other | Sand Hill Global Advisors 650-854-9150 Visit Site add_a_photo Overall info 5.0 Year Registered 92, Filing 9; McCaffrey Depo. 39, Filing Although it is clear from a plain reading of 2(f) that it does not apply to unregistered marks, Defendant did not specifically make such an argument. at 12, Dkt. Public Records Policy. In view of the dearth of evidence of actual confusion, the Court finds that this factor weighs in favor of Defendant. (Davidson Decl. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2010) Modified on 2/18/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Co., 704 F.2d 1575, 1577 (Fed.Cir.1983) (common use of "DRC" mark not likely to cause confusion where products were "quite distinct"). 2505 (internal citations omitted). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Related document(s) 36 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 11/19/2009) (Entered: 11/19/2009), Declaration of Rachel R. Davidson in Support of 36 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed bySand Hill Advisors LLC. at 22.) (McCaffrey Depo. (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 2/3/2009) Modified on 2/4/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Fed.R.Civ.P 72(b)(1); see Holder v. Holder, 392 F.3d 1009, 1022 (9th Cir. This is particularly true where the good or service is expensive. Having failed to show secondary meaning, Plaintiff cannot establish that it possesses a protectable mark, which is an essential element of its claim for service mark infringement. Japan Telecom, 287 F.3d at 871; see also Comm. (Id. Neither party discusses the threshold question of whether section 2(f) is germane in an infringement case where the mark is unregistered. Filing 92. at 132:12-133:8; Conway Depo. "Some factors are much more helpful than others, and the relative importance of each individual factor will be case specific. [I]t is often possible to reach a conclusion with respect to likelihood of confusion after considering only a subset of the factors." 0000001032 00000 n 's Mot. (Entered: 12/22/2009), Reply Memorandum re 36 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. at 250, 106 S.Ct. C.) In March 1999, Conway, Williams & Foster, Inc., again changed its name to Sand Hill Advisors, Inc. (Id. An issue of fact is "material" if, under the substantive law of the case, resolution of the factual dispute might affect the outcome of the claim. 79, Filing (Entered: 05/28/2009), STIPULATION to Amend Defendant Sand Hill Advisors LLC's Answer and Affirmative Defenses, filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC., Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Entrepreneur Media, 279 F.3d at 1148. Oct. 10, 2008) ("prevailing on the merits alone does not create a presumption that the suit was vexatious or in bad faith"). (Entered: 12/22/2009), *** Exhibit C FILED IN ERROR. 's Mot. at 13-18. The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download: Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. Def. However, neither of cases cited by Plaintiff supports that proposition. The Court has concluded above that "Sand Hill Advisors" is primarily geographically descriptive, which supports the conclusion that the mark is weak. First Republic Bank was shuttered by regulators early Monday, and all its deposits and most of its assets were acquired by JPMorgan. 56(e); Celotex, 477 U.S. at 324, 106 S.Ct. at 970. Plaintiff admittedly has no direct evidence of Defendant's intent to deceive, but instead claims that such intent can be inferred on the ground that Mr. Hill denied knowing about Plaintiff's existence at the time he registered Defendant as a limited liability company in 1999. Contact Email info@sandhillglobaladvisors.com. L.) Although it is not engaged in the purchase or sale of real estate on behalf of its clients, Plaintiff does provide advice and counseling on investments in real property and Real Estate Investment Trusts, real estate financing alternatives, management alternatives, asset allocation and trends in the real estate market. 1979). (Opp'n at 25.) 85. Motion Hearing set for 2/23/2010 01:00 PM in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Oakland. 's Opp'n to Def. 10 22 Gary Conway testified at his deposition that the founders selected the "Sand Hill" name because the firm's offices were located on Sand Hill Road and they wanted to "trumpet" their location due to its "cache." As set forth in the Court's summary judgment order, Defendant raised a number of potentially viable arguments to show that its mark is suggestive, notwithstanding Plaintiff's acknowledgement. Sand Hill Global Advisors Review Relying on that standard, Plaintiff takes the position that Defendant did not begin using the "Sand Hill Advisors" mark in commerce until 2005, when started using the mark in connection with its website and on banners and flyers. 0000001331 00000 n for Summ. 0000000860 00000 n [3] Plaintiff's assertion that "Sand Hill Advisors" is suggestive also is at odds with Mr. Conway's acknowledgment the founders selected such name because it was "a more generic title." Id. Classic Media, Inc. v. Mewborn, 532 F.3d 978, 990 (9th Cir. Defendant next argues that even if Plaintiff could demonstrate that it has a protectable mark, Plaintiff cannot show that Defendant's use of the identical mark is likely to cause consumer confusion. GoTo. The recommendation of the Magistrate is ADOPTED and Defendant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees is DENIED. 's Mot. Here, there is scant evidence of actual confusion, which weighs in favor of Defendant. 1997). 0000005191 00000 n "Exceptional circumstances can be found when the non-prevailing party's case is groundless, unreasonable, vexatious, or pursued in bad faith." IAPD - Investment Adviser Public Disclosure - Homepage Applied Info. Here, after considering each of the Sleekcraft factors, the Court concluded that while Plaintiff and Defendant share the same mark, they offer completely distinct services to distinct consumers in separate markets, and there was but a paucity of evidence of actual confusion. As a result of Plaintiff's inability to register the name "Sand Hill Advisors LLC" with the California Secretary of State, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant in this Court on Pursuant to Local Rule 3-16 (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 2/2/2009) (Entered: 02/02/2009), Certificate of Interested Entities by Sand Hill Advisors LLC Pursuant to Local Rule 3-16 (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 1/30/2009) (Entered: 01/30/2009), ***ERRONEOUS ENTRY, PLEASE REFER TO DOCUMENT 19 *** Certificate of Interested Entities by Sand Hill Advisors LLC Pursuant to Local Rule 3-16 (Miller, Katherine) (Filed on 1/30/2009) Modified on 2/3/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF).
Allen Collins Daughters Today,
Why Did Dorothy Always Wear Boots,
Alteryx Customer Support Engineer Salary,
Balloon Classes In Houston,
How To Spot Fake Shiseido Ultimune,
Articles S