IOW LLC v. Breus ( 2019 )

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 IOW, LLC, an Arizona limited liability No. CV18-1649-PHX-DGC company; and When Enterprises Corp., a 10 Delaware corporation, ORDER 11 Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants, 12 v. 13 Michael Breus and Lauren Breus, husband and wife, 14 Defendants/Counterclaimants. 15 16 17 Defendants move for reconsideration of the Court’s order denying summary 18 judgment on Plaintiffs’ claims for trademark infringement and unfair competition 19 (Counts Five and Six). Doc. 101; see Doc. 94. Plaintiffs have filed a response. Doc. 106. 20 A motion for reconsideration may be granted upon “a showing of manifest error or 21 a showing of new facts or legal authority that could not have been brought to [the Court’s] 22 attention earlier with reasonable diligence.” LRCiv 7.2(g)(1). Defendants argue that the 23 Court manifestly erred in holding that Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994, 999 (2d Cir. 24 1989), does not apply to Dr. Breus’s The Power of When book. Doc. 101 at 2-8; see 25 Doc. 94 at 19-22. 26 After again reviewing relevant case law, the Court agrees. The Court will enter an 27 amended order granting summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ trademark infringement and 28 unfair competition claims under Rogers. Given this ruling, Defendants’ argument that the 1 || Court misapprehended the issue of priority as to Plaintiffs’ “Power of When” mark is moot. 2|| See Doc. 101 at 8-9. The Court will deny the motion for reconsideration in this respect. 3 IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for reconsideration (Doc. 101) is 4|| granted in part and denied in part as set forth above. The Court will issue a separate 5 || order amending its initial summary judgment order (Doc. 94). 6 Dated this 2nd day of December, 2019. 7 . Saul 6. Cunpllt 9 David Campbell 10 Senior United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _2-