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.

Mulcahy LLP® Information

CLICK BELOW TO LEARN MORE

CONTACT MULCAHY LLP®

FOR MORE INFORMATION

 
 
 
 
 


mulcahyfontlogo.jpg

4 Park Plaza, Suite 1230
Irvine, CA 92614
T 949.252.9377
F 949.252.0090

Copyright ©2012 Mulcahy LLP. All rights reserved. The transmission of information to and from the site, in part or in whole, does not create, and receipt does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between senders and/or recipients and Mulcahy LLP.

Privacy Policy and our Disclaimer.   Franchise Law

mulcahyfontlogo.jpg