Monster also asked that the court strike VPX’s jury demand because the remaining remedies VPX was requesting were equitable, not legal, and provided no right to a jury trial. During the deposition of VPX’s CEO, he “evaded nearly all of Monster’s damages-related questions,” and Monster eventually moved to strike VPX’s claim for actual damages due to VPX’s failure to provide any type of calculation. When it moved for an extension, the district court denied the motion and VPX did not challenge that ruling on appeal. However, VPX never produced the expert reports by the deadline, claiming that it missed the deadline due to a docketing error.
Monster subsequently requested more information about “the method and the basis for computing those damages,” and VPX responded that the request was “premature.” It said that information would be divulged via expert reports and testimony and, in the meantime, it provided financial records related to the sale of the Bang products. In its initial disclosures in May 2019, VPX failed to provide a computation of damages, saying that it needed discovery from Monster in order to do so. Ultimately, the district court found in August of 2021, in a 128-page order, that VPX had not established that its trade dress was entitled to protection, that its contention “that Monster had stolen the precise colors Bang had used in its cans-down to the very last shade-in a craven effort to pass its product off as Bang’s…had been totally debunked,” and that Reign’s entry into the market was not likely to cause confusion. Specifically, VPX claimed that Monster’s “Reign” line of energy drinks infringed VPX’s “Bang” drinks, causing a likelihood of confusion among consumers. VPX filed a complaint against Monster in 2019 seeking injunctive relief, damages, and disgorgement of profits for trademark and trade dress infringement and unfair competition. The Eleventh Circuit also denied Monster’s motion for sanctions in the form of attorney’s fees and double costs. (VPX) in the form of sanctions for violating its discovery obligations in a trade dress dispute with Monster Energy Company. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling against Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
0 kommentar(er)
