Trt Transportation, Inc. v. Aksoy

506 Fed.Appx 511 (7th Cir. 2013)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P operates a fleet of trolleys and offers sightseeing tours as well as rentals for special events. P sued D claiming trademark infringement, trade-dress infringement, and cybersquatting in violation of the Lanham Act. P alleged that D offered substantially similar services under the name 'Chicago Trolley Rentals,' used trolleys copying its distinctive paint colors and patterns, and advertising services on the website www.chicagotrolleyrentals.com. The parties engaged in a settlement conference with a magistrate judge. The parties went on record to state the material terms they had agreed upon, specifically: (1) D would redirect their website and transfer the original website to P, (2) D would be allowed to purchase the phrase 'Chicago trolley' for keyword searches, (3) D would be enjoined from using the words 'Chicago' and 'trolley' 'together in any form or anything confusingly similar,' (4) D would not use TRT Transportation's color scheme in the future, and (5) the parties would share documents relating to a Groupon sale that occurred the day of the settlement. After reciting these terms P stated that 'all of this is going to be subject to a negotiation of a formal settlement agreement in an agreed injunction.' The magistrate judge then said: 'Right. But the injunction will include these terms. These terms are enforceable.' The parties agreed and concluded the settlement conference. A written agreement was never finished over a disagreement over the use of the phrase 'trolley rentals in Chicago.' D filed a 'motion for declaration of the absence of an enforceable settlement agreement,' and P moved to enforce the settlement. The district court found an enforceable agreement at the settlement conference and informed the parties that unless they submitted an executed settlement agreement, the court would enter a permanent injunction based on the terms announced at the settlement conference. Eventually, the court entered the injunction enjoining D pursuant to the 5 terms. D appealed.