Yellow Cab Co. of Sacramento v. Yellow Cab Co. of Elk Grove, Inc., No. Id. Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 791 (9th Cir. WebSand Hill Advisors LLC. Defendant now moves this Court for a de novo determination of the Magistrate's recommendation, and requests that the Court grant its motion for attorneys' fees. Sand Hill Global Advisors 650-854-9150 Visit Site add_a_photo Overall info 5.0 Year Registered Applied Info. (Entered: 12/15/2008), CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge. Given that Plaintiff and Defendant used the same mark in the same general geographical area, Plaintiff's position that the parties' simultaneous use of the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark was likely to cause confusion was certainly arguable. 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. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Exhibit M, # 14 Exhibit N, # 15 Exhibit O, # 16 Exhibit P, # 17 Exhibit Q, # 18 Exhibit R)(Related document(s) 36 ) (Davidson, Rachel) (Filed on 11/19/2009) (Entered: 11/19/2009), MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. Lahoti, 586 F.3d at 1197. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System. 2.) Here, there is no dispute that "Sand Hill" refers to a geographical locale *1114 on or near Sand Hill Road in the Silicon Valley and that Plaintiff, in fact, chose "Sand Hill" because of its geographical significance. for Summ. startxref As an initial matter, Defendant argues that since Plaintiff's founders acknowledged choosing SAND HILL ADVISORS because of its geographical significance, i.e., the company's then new location on Sand Hill Road in the heart of the Silicon Valley, Plaintiff was foreclosed from arguing that the SAND HILL ADVISORS mark was anything other than descriptive. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/28/2009) Modified on 5/29/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Since around 1995, Plaintiff has provided a variety of financial and advisory services to its "high net-worth" clients to assist them in the investment and management of their assets. The Court concludes that Plaintiff's mark is weak and that this factor weighs in favor of Defendant. They're working to cleanup and update technology and procedures (the new website looks great), which is a positive, but overdue. In that case, plaintiff Rodeo Collection, Inc., held several registered services marks for the mark "Rodeo Collection," which it used in connection with providing shopping center services. And how much will banks have to pay? 15-20, Dkt. (Opp'n at 23.) Defendant filed a reply memorandum, and the matter is now fully briefed. Aug. 13, 2007). See Applied Info. STIPULATION AND ORDER re Pretrial Schedule. However, the likelihood of confusion is obviated where, as here, the services are unrelated and the parties operate in distinct markets with no overlap in customers. 2005). UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy. ***Civil Case Terminated. %PDF-1.4 Status Conference re: Arbitration scheduled for 08/29/2023 at 08:30 AM in Santa Monica Courthouse at Department R, Pursuant 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, Minute Order (Status Conference re: Arbitration), Updated -- Declaration Of Frank D. Rorie JR. 7-1(b). "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." Sand Hill Global Advisors (SHGA) has taken out a government-backed coronavirus relief loan, the $2.7bn RIA disclosed in a recent Form ADV update. HWv6}WGj}I-Y]Ih RdJRx>#wHY 8}9|n{oXxlW0A(x{3|ZUzjlWgQ?mf7Es2P2AB& nwdse%7YPI*eoFH1GI!| Id. (Court Reporter: Not Reported) (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 2/18/2009) Modified on 2/20/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. 's Mot. Thus, the Court concludes that "Sand Hill Advisors" is primarily geographically descriptive. F, Hill Depo. Entrepreneur Media, Inc. v. Smith, 279 F.3d 1135, 1144 (9th Cir.2002). 0000000913 00000 n However, neither of cases cited by Plaintiff supports that proposition. for Summ. (Entered: 01/05/2009), ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. "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].'" Lahoti, 586 F.3d at 1201. Mar. In that case, plaintiff Instant Media alleged that its trademark "I'M" was infringed by defendant Microsoft's use of the mark "i'm." Astra Pharm. (McCaffrey Depo. 28 U.S.C. And so that was our address, but we felt it was an address that we wanted to trumpet. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. The court explained that there are two tests to determine the strength of a mark in the marketplace: the "imagination test" and the "need test." Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 4/5/2010. startxref Pl. WebSAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. SAND HILL ADVISORS, LLC, a California limited liability company, Dkt. (Martin, James) (Filed on 1/22/2010) Modified on 1/25/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Sand Hill, which caters primarily to high-net-worth individuals in Northern California, has $900 million of assets under management. Co., 704 F.2d 1575, 1577 (Fed.Cir.1983) (common use of "DRC" mark not likely to cause confusion where products were "quite distinct"). of Court Order Continuing CMC; Filed by: Yida Gao (Plaintiff); As to: Adam B. Cancellation and Refund Policy, Privacy Policy, and *1109 Rachel R. Davidson of K & L Gates, LLP for Defendant, Sand Hill Advisors. Plaintiff's desire to protect such interests is a legitimate one. Modified on 11/23/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF). 1983) (holding that the fact that plaintiff and defendant's respective products were used in the medical or health care field was insufficient to show that the goods were sufficiently similar to cause a likelihood of confusion). A subscription to PACER is required. See Stephen W. Boney, 127 F.3d at 827 (finding that plaintiff had a "legitimate objective" in filing suit "to `preserve the right to use the name if and when I want to use it'"). WebREPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 61 MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC Objections to R&R due by 6/15/2010. Sand Hill Def. Fed.R.Civ.P. Contact Email info@sandhillglobaladvisors.com. Filed by Sand Hill Advisors LLC. STRUCK, ET AL. See Japan Telecom, Inc. v. Japan Telecom Am.
Bend Mugshots 2021, Payne V Tennessee Just Mercy, Blue Bloods Cast Guest Stars, 5 Cool Covered Commodities Produce, Where Does Ariana Grande Get Her Clothes From, Articles S