Intellectual Property Law

Western District Transfers Leather Product False Advertising Case to Ohio

By Michael Atkins

STL regulars may remember the false advertising and product disparagement case that Design Resources, Inc., brought last year against defendants Leather Industries of America, Inc., and Nicholas Cory.

The complaint alleged Dr. Cory, who tested Design Resources’ NEXTLEATHER product at the Leather Research Laboratory, a Leather Industries affiliate, advised Design Resources that the product could be called “bonded leather,” and then proceeded to disparage the labeling, marketing and selling of the product as “bonded leather.”

Defendants moved to dismiss or transfer venue pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3).

On Jan. 21, Western District Judge Ricardo Martinez granted the motion in part and transferred the case to the Southern District of Ohio. 

The court found: “The entire focus of these allegations is Dr. Cory, his testing of DRI’s product, and his subsequent statements — all of which occurred in Ohio, where Dr. Cory resides and where the LRL testing laboratory is located. DRI asserts that it ‘came to Dr. Nicholas Cory and his and LIA’s laboratory, Leather Research Laboratory (‘LRL’), for th testing…’ Dr. Cory has established by his Declaration that he has never visited Washington State, nor does he own property or maintain a bank account in this State. The only evidence offered by DRI in opposition to the Rule 12(b)(3) motion are invoices sent by LRI to DRI for the work performed by Dr. Cory at LRL in Ohio. These invoices are wholly insufficient to establish that a ‘substantial part’ of the events giving rise to this action occurred in Washington.”

The court found that Design Resources could have brought the action in the Southern District of Ohio, where Dr. Cory resides and where the testing took place. The court, therefore, decided to transfer the action there rather than dismiss it.

The case cite is Design Resources, Inc. v. Leather Industries of America, Inc., No. 09-00611 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 21, 2010).

Full post as published by Seattle Trademark Lawyer on January 26, 2010 (boomark / email).