ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Trademark Law Blogs -> Las Vegas Trademark Attorney

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Trademark Law

: Las Vegas Trademark Attorney

Las Vegas Businessman ordered to stop using the name COHIBA on cigars and rum

By Ryan Gile

ADVERTISEMENTS
The Associated Press reported today (link here) that Las Vegas businessman Philip Restifo, President of the Nevada corporation Cohiba Caribbean?s Finest Inc. and the Bahamas corporation Data Commodities Ltd., was ordered on June 30, 2008 by U.S. District Court Judge Brian Sandoval to stop using the mark COHIBA on cigars and rum and to pay General Cigar Co., the owner of the COHIBA mark for cigars, $770,000 in damages plus legal costs.

The Cohiba Caribbean's Finest Cigar


The order banned Restifo and his affiliated companies from the importing, marketing, distributing and selling of "Cohiba Caribbean's Finest" cigars and rum. Apparently, Restifo?s use of the COHIBA on his cigars was prominent and the "Caribbean's Finest" were in small italicized font. General Cigar?s vice president and general counsel called Restifo's businesses the most aggressive among several Cohiba counterfeiters in the nation. [Query: Is Restifo a big Cohiba rum counterfeiter as well?]

A real Cohiba® cigar

The Cohiba, which apparently gets its name from the Taino word for "tobacco," was originally the private brand of cigar for Fidel Castro, but is now produced and sold publicly by Habanos SA, the state owned tobacco company. The Cohiba imported into the U.S. by General Cigar Co. are actually made in the Dominican Republic in order to get around the U.S. ban on trade with Cuba.

Restifo was quoted as saying that as of the 30th, his company stopped sales of the rum and pulled down his website. And while it?s true that if you go to http://www.cohibarum.com/, the home page that appears states the following:

Will no longer be servicing for sale or Wholesale,the products of Cohiba Carribbeans Finest.

Due to Big Bully Business and a pure lack of Money...We could no longer afford to defend our Position.

Please remember General Cigar has never been in theLiqour Business!!!!!!

Court orders have reduced an Honost Brand name to the level of Mogel Money Monsters.

General Cigar without Merit and deep pockets transformed a Mom & Pop Liqour [sic] operation into being the Al Capones of the Cigar & liquor Industry.


However, Restifo?s original home page is still accessible through http://www.cohibarum.com/home.html (Check out the COHIBA girls!). You can view the ?infringing? cigar products at http://www.cohibarum.com/cigars.html.


And while I have not reviewed the actual court documents in the litigation, Mr. Restifo?s statements about General Cigar not being in the rum business may have merit. While General Cigar Co. has two registrations for the mark COHIBA for cigars (one registered in 1981 and a second in 1992), its two applications to register the mark for rum (among many other classes of goods) were not filed until 1996 ? and even then, the basis was intent-to-use and General Cigar has never updated the basis to reflect use-in-commerce. The application has been continuously suspended pending the outcome of another intent-to-use application to register COHIBA for alcoholic beverages, namely, tequila filed in 1995 by Tequila Cuervo La Rojena, S.A. de C.V., which itself has been the subject of an opposition filed in March 10, 2000 by, guess who, General Cigar Co. (Opposition cite unavailable due to an error with the TTABVUE).

In addition, there was another application filed in 2000 by New Yorker Kereskedelmi Kft., a Hungarian corporation, for the mark COHIBA for various goods including alcoholic beverages (including rum). The application, originally filed as an intent-to-use (under Section 1(b) and Section 44(d)), now has an established priority date of September 15, 2000 based on its registration for the mark in Hungary ? although oddly enough, the registration does not support the alcoholic beverage goods and the applicant had to revert to Section 1(b) for such goods.

All of this fighting over a word that in Spanish actually means ?stifle? or ?restrain? (a conjugated form of the Spanish verb ?cohibir?).

Full post as published by Las Vegas Trademark Attorney on July 12, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.017 secs (new cache)