No Infringement Found in Trademark Case Over Il Portico Restaurant Name
The case involved two eponymous restaurants: one opened in Philadelphia and later moved to New Jersey, and another in New York.
November 06, 2019 at 07:38 PM
5 minute read
A U.S. District Court Judge agrees with the owner of II Portico restaurant, formerly in Center City Philadelphia and now in Burlington that he didn't infringe on the trademark of a restaurant with the same name located in New York.
The New York owner owner, Fife and Drum Inc. claimed in a 2017 suit that it registered the "Il Portico" name in Tappan, New York, in 1990 and alleged that defendant Delbello Enterprises later copied.
The name means "The Porch" in English.
In The Fife and Drum v. Delbello Enterprises, U.S. Distsrict Judge Noel L. Hillman of the District of New Jersey, sitting in Camden, said Fife and Drum failed to prove that the identical names caused customer confusion and also ruled that the plaintiff waited too long to file suit.
"The Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to prove that Defendant infringed on its trademark," Hillman wrote in the opinion dated Nov. 1. "Even if Plaintiff were able to prove its claim of trademark infringement, injunctive relief would be barred by the equitable doctrine of laches."
"An accompanying Order will be entered directing Judgment in Defendant's favor and dismissing the action in full," Hillman wrote.
Cherry Hill solo Norman Elliot Lehrer represented Fife and Drum. Reached by phone Wednesday, he said he had no comment.
Ahmed M. Soliman of Soliman & Associates in Cherry Hill represented Delbello Enterprises and Chef Alberto Delbello.
Soliman said in a statement that the court "correctly reasoned that Il Portico is entitled to protections under federal law in situations like this where there is no likelihood of confusion between a restaurant in New York and that of my client nearly 100 miles away, and where the trademark was never enforced by plaintiff for several years."
Fife and Drum opened "Il Portico Ristorante" in October 1988 in Tappan. It is also known as Tappan Il Portico, or TIP. The owner is Giuseppe Peppe Pinton.
The Lanham Act precludes a defendant from challenging the ownership of a registered trademark after a period of five years if the registered trademark owner complies with certain formalities. These marks are referred to as "incontestable" under the Lanham Act.
According to the decision, around May 1995, IEJ Corp., based in Bensalem, Pennsylvania, opened an Italian fine dining restaurant in Philadelphia named "Il Portico."
Alberto DelBello was the principal of IEJ, and the owner and chef of the Philadelphia restaurant.
In 2012, DelBello closed the restaurant under the name Il Portico and renamed it "Tiramisu" at the same location until its permanent closure in 2016, when he moved to the suburbs and opened "Il Portico" in Burlington.
DelBello testified that he transferred the rights to the name "Il Portico" from the Philadelphia entity to the Burlington one.
On May 23, 2017, Fife and Drum filed its complaint, claiming trademark infringement, among other counts. The amended complaint sought only injunctive relief, waiving claims for damages, attorney fees, costs and interest.
Only one of the suit's five claims, for trademark infringement, was considered in Hillman's ruling, which followed a one-day trial May 13.
Delbello argued that Fife and Drum's suit was barred by the equitable doctrine of laches, which would bar relief even if it had infringed on Fife and Drum's trademark.
Hillman in his Nov. 1 ruling agreed.
"Laches becomes relevant where a senior trademark user 'delays in asserting its rights for so long that the junior user has developed sufficient demand and goodwill through its own efforts that it would be inequitable to enforce the senior's rights.'" he wrote.
Hillman said Fife and Drum had a right to file and maintain a suit from 1995 when the Philadelphia Il Portico opened, but didn't until after 2017, a 17-year gap.
The court still sought to determine the merits of Fife and Drum's Lanham Act claim, which requires a plaintiff to "demonstrate that (1) it has a valid and legally protectable mark; (2) it owns the mark; and (3) the defendant's use of the mark to identify goods or services causes a likelihood of confusion."
The parties did not dispute that Fife and Drum established the first two elements.
Hillman said, "A likelihood of confusion exists when the consumers viewing the mark would probably assume that the product or service it represents is associated with the source of a different product or service identified by a similar mark."
He said the identical names "weighs heavily in favor of a finding of likelihood of confusion."
But as for other factors, including the 17 years when there was no actual confusion between the two, are more problematic for Fife and Drum to surmount, said Hillman.
He also said Fife and Drum failed to demonstrate that Delbello acted with an intent to confuse, not merely an intent to copy, when it adopted the "Il Portico" mark in Philadelphia in 1995.
"While Plaintiff sought to suggest that the long delay in opening [in Burlington] proved abandonment and some form of mal-intent in resurrecting the name in the Burlington location, Defendant's explanation rings true," Hillman wrote.
"On the record as a whole, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has failed to meet its burden of establishing a likelihood of confusion," Hillman wrote. "Therefore, Plaintiff's trademark infringement claim fails."
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 AllJudge Dismisses Suit Over Arbitrators' Role in Scheme to Extract Quick Settlements
5 minute readTrending Stories
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