¶¶ 4–5.) 12 In the fourth quarter of 2011, Lepton Labs and Focus Marketing (collectively, 13 “Lepton Labs” or “Plaintiffs”) entered into a written advertising agreement with 14 W4-an online performance marketing company. (FAC ¶ 3.) Plaintiffs Focus Marketing, a promotion and 10 marketing company, teamed up with Lepton Labs to market and sell AllDaySlim. 7 Lepton Labs specializes in dietary supplements and has created the supplement 8 9 FACTUAL BACKGROUND called AllDaySlim. The Court thus DENIES W4’s Motion to Dismiss.1 6 (ECF No. The Court 3 finds that Plaintiffs may allege protectable trade dress in their website design and that 4 they have also stated actionable claims for contributory trade-dress infringement, 5 unfair competition, and fraud. Plaintiffs allege that W4 disclosed this confidential 28 information to Defendants Gulf Rayz Media, LLC and Andrew Jensen for their use in 1 developing a nearly identical website for SlimBlastFast-a competing product- 2 notwithstanding W4’s exclusive marketing agreement with Lepton Labs. 25 This action arises out of W4’s alleged misappropriation of Plaintiff Lepton 26 Labs, LLC’s trade-secret and trade-dress information relating to AllDaySlim, a dietary 27 supplement sold by Plaintiffs. INTRODUCTION 22 Can a website’s design constitute protectable trade dress under the Lanham 23 Act? If so, under what circumstances? The Court must squarely confront these issues 24 and others in this Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant W4, LLC. MOTION TO DISMISS 15 JASON DURANT WALKER RACHEL 16 LASSEFF GULF RAYZ MEDIA, LLC 17 ANDREW JENSEN STRATIX 18 HEALTH, LLC W4, LLC DOES 1–10, 19 inclusive, 20 21 Defendants. 27 O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 United States District Court Central District of California 8 9 10 11 12 Case 2:14-cv-04836-ODW(MANx) LEPTON LABS, LLC FOCUS MARKETING LLC, Plaintiffs, 13 14 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S v.
0 kommentar(er)
