Pro-Football,Inc. v. Blackhorse et al, No. 1:2014cv01043 - Document 161 (E.D. Va. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - It is hereby ORDERED that PFI's Motion for Summary Judgment on Constitutional Claims (Doc.54) and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Claims I, II, and VII (Doc. 79) are DENIED; it is further ORDERED that Blackhor se Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Claims Ill-VI (Doc. 105), the United States of America's Motion for Summary Judgment on Constitutional Claims (Doc. 108), and Blackhorse Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Cou nts I, II, and VII of Complaint (Doc. 69) are GRANTED; it is further ORDERED that the TTAB's ruling in Blackhorse v. Pro-Football, Inc., 111 U.S.P.Q.2d 1080, 2014 WL 2757516 (T.T.A.B. 2014), is AFFIRMED; and it is further ORDERED that the United States Patent and Trademark Office is DIRECTED to schedule the cancellation of the registrations for the following six marks: Registration No.0836122, Registration No. 0978824, Registration No. 098666, Registration No. 0987127, Registration No. 1085092, and Registration No. 1606810. Signed by District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee on 7/8/2015. (dvanm, )
Pro-Football,Inc. v. Blackhorse et al Doc. 161 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION PRO-FOOTBALL, INC., Plaintiff, V. AMANDA BLACKHORSE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 1:14-cv-01043-GBL.IDD MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on two sets of cross-motions for summary judgment. First, Plaintiff Pro-Football, Inc. ("PFI"), Defendants Amanda Blackhorse, Marcus BriggsCloud, Phillip Cover, Jillian Pappan, and Courtney Tsotigh ("Blackhorse Defendants"), and the United States of America filed cross-motions for summary judgment on PFI's claims challenging the constitutionality of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act (Counts III-VI) (Docs. 54, 105, and 108). Second, Blackhorse Defendants and PFI filed cross-motions for summary judgment on PFI's claims contesting the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's ("TTAB") Order cancelling the registrations of six of PFI's trademarks on the grounds that they consisted of matter that "may disparage" Native Americans and bring them into contempt or disrepute, and that the defense of laches does not bar the claims (Counts I, II, and VII) (Docs. 69 and 79). This case concerns Blackhorse Defendants' petition to cancel the registration of six trademarks owned by PFI on the grounds that the marks consisted of matter that "may disparage" a substantial composite of Native Americans and bring them into contempt or disrepute under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), at the time of their registrations (1967, 1974, 1978, and 1990). Dockets.Justia.com
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Terms of Service