Violation of the Lanham Act
Submarina v. Sial
By Mulcahy LLP on January 08, 2013
In Submarina v. Sial (U.S. District Court, Southern District of California) the firm obtained a TRO on behalf of a franchisor against a franchisee for violation of the Lanham Act. The TRO not only enjoined the operation of a store by the franchisee, but also permitted the franchisor to assume control of it.
The firm then obtained a preliminary injunction, after which the matter settled, with the franchisee paying all past due royalties, agreeing to terminate the franchise, and paying the firm’s client its attorneys’ fees and costs.
CLICK BELOW TO LEARN MORE
CONTACT FOR MORE INFORMATION