Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Seattle Trademark Lawyer
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: Seattle Trademark LawyerWestern District Denies Contempt Motion in "Hendrix Electric" Vodka Case
By Michael Atkins
The Experience Hendrix, LLC v. Electric Hendrix, LLC “Hendrix Electric” vodka case is over.
Mostly.
Plaintiffs now seek to collect their judgment against defendants, including Craig Dieffenbach.
Plaintiffs recently complained that Mr. Dieffenbach was not forthcoming during supplemental proceedings. Indeed, they moved for an order of contempt, arguing that defendants’ “evasive and incomplete responses” to plaintiffs’ discovery efforts have “frustrated” their ability to determine if defendants have concealed or fraudulently conveyed assets that could be used to satisfy the judgment.
Today, Western District Judge Thomas Zilly denied the motion without prejudice.
The court found: “Plaintiffs make no showing that Mr. Dieffenbach failed to comply with the Court’s Order dated October 28, 2009, which simply required responses within twenty days, or with any other order. Moreover, plaintiffs offer no evidence to support their assertion that Mr. Dieffenbach’s answers were untruthful. Although the tenor of the deposition was acrimonious, Mr. Dieffenbach’s animosity alone does not establish that he was being less than candid when he indicated that he ‘own[s] nothing,’ has ‘no assets,’ and ‘owe[s] money to absolutely everybody.’ In their motion for contempt, plaintiffs do not request monetary sanctions, but rather seek an order from the Court requiring Mr. Dieffenbach inter alia to sign stipulations to release bank records and to locate and produce documents under the control of other people, namely current and/or former attorneys, bookkeepers, accountants, and employees. Plaintiffs fail to explain, however, why they cannot obtain the documents they seek by serving these entities or individuals with appropriate subpoenas or discovery requests.”
The case cite is Experience Hendrix, LLC v. Electric Hendrix, LLC, No. 07-338 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2010).
Full post as published by Seattle Trademark Lawyer on February 04, 2010 (boomark / email).
Western Culinary Institute
allegedly mislead and ill-prepared students.
Western Canada Lottery Corporation
Faces $100 Million Class Action
CoServe Electric
Members Launch Class Action
Power Station
Rochester Gas and Electric agrees to pay $700,000 environmental pollution settlement.
Asbestos Cleanup
Penn. Electric Co. pays part of $77,498 settlement in environmental lawsuit.
General Electric Co. and SABIC Innovative Plastics
$3 million settlement reached in intellectual property dispute.

SUITS: "Judge denies PVAs' motion"
“Excuse me while I kiss this guy”
There must be some kind of way out of here
"D.C. Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss in Wone Case"
District Court Denies Summary Judgment Motion in Media Case; Rules That New Jersey Law Applies
Contempt! Court Grants TiVo's Motion Against Echostar








