San Diego Comic Convention Awarded $4M in Fees and Costs
Although a jury found that Salt Lake Comic Con's trademark infringement wasn't willful, Judge Anthony Battaglia declared the case "exceptional."
August 24, 2018 at 07:13 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
The San Diego Comic Convention has won $4 million in “exceptional case” attorney fees and expenses, along with an injunction blocking its Salt Lake rival from using the “comic con” mark.
U.S. District Judge Anthony Battaglia of the Southern District of California's post-trial orders Thursday in San Diego Comic Convention v. Dan Farr Productions salvages a December jury verdict that found trademark infringement but awarded the San Diego event only $20,000.
The organizers of Salt Lake Comic Con, now rebranded FanX Salt Lake Comic Convention, argued that the “split verdict” meant there was no prevailing party who could claim fees. Battaglia disagreed, finding the San Diego event prevailed and that defendant Dan Farr Productions (DFP) litigated the case in an unreasonable manner.
“At every opportunity, DFP has repeated, re-argued, and recycled arguments already briefed by both parties and analyzed and ruled on by the court,” Battaglia wrote. “This type of wasteful litigation tactic forced SDCC to expend extra, unnecessary legal fees and drove this court to squander already limited judicial resources.”
He awarded $3.96 million out of the $5.2 million sought by San Diego Comic Con, and enjoined DFP from using “comic con” or anything confusingly similar. Battaglia also ordered DFP to give up its web address saltlakecomiccon.com, even though it's used now only to redirect users to the new fanxsaltlake.com address.
San Diego Comic Con had also sought to block DFP from using the more formal “comic convention” as part of its name, but Battaglia would not go that far.
Still, San Diego Comic Con sounded happy with the outcome. “The rulings confirm that defendants and their attorneys engaged in outrageous conduct before the lawsuit was filed, throughout the case, at trial and post-trial,” Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman partner Peter Hahn said in an emailed statement.
“We are grateful to the jury that found in our favor and to the court that upheld the jury verdict,” San Diego Comic Con's chief communications officer David Glanzer added. “We have always preferred, and continue to prefer, resolving disputes outside of court, but the defendants' conduct made that impossible in this case.”
An attorney for Dan Farr Productions said an appeal is in the works. “Our clients do not expect a $4 million attorney fee award predicated on a $20,000 jury verdict to survive appellate review,” Maschoff Brennan partner Michael Katz said via email. “They have instructed us to begin working on an appeal to the Ninth Circuit—while they prepare for what they expect to be their best event ever, starting September 6.”
The San Diego Comic Convention has been operating its annual comic-con event since the 1970s. The event now includes science fiction and fantasy authors, film and television actors, directors, producers and writers. In recent years it has drawn as many as 135,000 attendees over four days.
Dan Farr Productions began promoting Salt Lake Comic Con in 2013. The company has argued that “comic con” is a generic mark used by hundreds of similar conventions around the world. Battaglia presided over an eight-day trial last fall.
On Thursday, Battaglia criticized the plaintiffs for ignoring San Diego Comic Con's cease-and-desist letter years ago. Instead of hiring an attorney or reaching out to the San Diego event's legal team, the defendants registered their own Salt Lake Comic Con mark with the USPTO.
The defendants argued that was an end-around the jury's explicit finding that they did not act willfully, but Battaglia disagreed.
The judge found the Pillsbury attorneys' billing rates reasonable, but reduced the fee request because the firm billed in quarter-hour increments, rather than tenth-of-an-hour, and because some billing entries were vaguely worded.
DFP argued that it already has changed the Salt Lake event's name, but Battaglia said that's no reason not to grant an injunction. He found “without hesitation” that DFP should be enjoined from using Comic Con, ComicKon or any “confusingly similar phrase.”
But that did not extend to “comic convention.” The San Diego event “does not own the trademark to 'Comic Convention' and competitors in this industry should be allowed to use the word 'convention,'” he wrote. Plus, he noted, during opening statements, San Diego Comic Con had suggested that DFP should simply rename its event the Salt Lake Comic Convention. “Post-trial and post-verdict, DFP did exactly what SDCC asked,” Battaglia wrote.
He also spared the Salt Lake event from San Diego's demand that it destroy its “historical archive” with materials from its previous Salt Lake Comic Con shows—so long as it doesn't sell, distribute, reproduce, republish, or make any commercial use of any of those materials.”
Pillsbury's trial team also included partners Callie Bjurstrom and Michelle Herrera, counsel Nathaniel Smith and associates Lauren Wardle and Matthew Stephens.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUS Judge Rejects Morgan Stanley Reconsideration Bid in Deferred Compensation Litigation
Transgender Woman Awarded $150K Default Judgment Against Corrections Officer for Alleged Assault
Legal Speak: A Convicted Felon is Coming to the White House. What Happens Now?
1 minute readAT&T General Counsel Joins ADM Board as Company Reels From Accounting Scandal
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250