Importer Can't File CIT Lawsuit Anonymously to Protect Against Other Lawsuits, CIT Says
An importer of gray market batteries currently embroiled in a customs lawsuit with Duracell cannot use an anonymous pseudonym to protect itself from trademark suits in other courts, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued Sept. 12. Recently having ruled that the anonymous “XYZ Corporation” can challenge Duracell’s lever rule protections against gray market imports (see 1707240031), the court held the company must give up its pseudonym and file a new complaint with its true identity.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
XYZ Corporation had argued that revealing its real name would allow Duracell to file lawsuits in district court for alleged infringement of Duracell’s trademark, bankrupting XYZ Corporation and destroying its reputation. But “courts should not permit parties to proceed pseudonymously just to protect the parties’ professional or economic life,” CIT said, citing a federal district court ruling from 2004. “[XYZ Corporation’s] reason for anonymity -- to avoid a potential suit in another forum and prevent financial hardship -- does not present the type of special circumstance that warrants the use of a pseudonym,” it said.
(XYZ Corp. v. U.S., Slip Op. 17-124, CIT # 17-00125, dated 09/12/17, Judge Choe-Groves)
(Attorneys: John Peterson of Neville Peterson for plaintiff XYZ Corporation; Alexander Vanderweide for defendant U.S. government; Frances Hadfield of Crowell & Moring for defendant-intervenor Duracell)