Crayola Filing Lawsuit Against E-Commerce Sellers for Trademark Infringement and Counterfeiting
The law firm Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. is back at it again: Case No. 22-cv-03902. Crayola has filed a suit against e-commerce sellers. The company claims these folks have formed an organized counterfeiting ring. To be clear, the global crayon and art supply giant is primarily aiming the lawsuit at Chinese-based sellers. In other words, those utilizing multiple platforms, such as Amazon, Walmart, Wish.com, eBay, DHgate, and Etsy all over the world.
Chinese E-Commerce Sellers Sued by Crayola: Why Is This Happening to Me?!
Along these lines, Crayola further alleges that by defrauding the American marketplace, “significant health and safety risks” may occur. This is due to the fact that many of the company’s products are manufactured and advertised to children. In addition, e-commerce sellers are not subjected to enough scrutiny by the platforms themselves, so claims the suit. As a result, Crayola states they are incapable of determining each seller’s individual identity because they create too many online storefronts, as a way to develop a sort of smoke screen.
Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd., Case No. 22-cv-03902: Crayola Lawsuit Against E-Commerce Sellers
Here’s the solution: You must develop a plan of action! Our top-tier intellectual property attorneys will work closely with you to create a RESPONSE. You must provide an Answer to the court because THE NOTICE IS NOT SPAM. We strongly urge you to take the complaint filed against you seriously! The associated TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) will not vanish into thin air. And, we do not want you to be prohibited any longer from accessing the money your legitimate business has earned from selling Crayola products, as well as all other branded goods.
Absolutely Provide an Answer to the Court to Remove the Temporary Restraining Order
Feel free to email our firm or call (718)-657-7400 for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, be sure to review our blog weekly for new updates and information for e-commerce sellers.
Want to read more? Peruse our recent article about a similar General Motors lawsuit!
General Motors Suing Online Sellers for Alleged Sale of Counterfeit Products
Hey all, just in: GM is suing online sellers. The multi-billion dollar automotive conglomerate General Motors has filed a lawsuit. Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd: Case No. 22-cv-04031. The suit alleges that sellers based in China and beyond are working together to offer counterfeit GM products to unknowing sellers. Additionally, the suit claims that e-commerce sellers on platforms like Amazon, Wish.com, Etsy, eBay, Walmart, DHgate, Alibaba, and AliExpress are specifically targeting US consumers. And even further, the lawsuit alleges that sellers just like you are responsible for GM losing billions of dollars.
What Does it All Mean?: GM Suing Online Sellers Case No. 22-cv-04031 Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd.
In short form, as one of the defendants in the GM lawsuit you should do one thing above all: RESPOND. We would love to tell you that you could just ignore this notice and continue with your business. However, we all know that is not possible at the moment. Mainly because what accompanies the lawsuit is a TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO). Oofa!
You Should Respond to the Lawsuit to Get the Temporary Restraining Order Lifted
The TRO is a serious roadblock to your success as an e-commerce seller. For example, it hinders your ability to touch the funds your online business has generated from the sale of GM products. Furthermore, it stops you from accessing the money you made from selling any other branded product. Consequently, you need to take action. Now, what precisely is that action?
GM Suing E-Commerce Sellers: Responding To The Lawsuit
Our experienced and dedicated team of intellectual property attorneys will work closely with you to compose a strategic Answer to the court. As a result of our collaboration, you will have the opportunity to present an ironclad defense in response to the alleged wrongdoing outlined in the Greer, Burns & Crain lawsuit. Ultimately, our aim is to help get the TRO removed from your accounts so you can continue to conduct business online and make money. Contact us today for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, check out our blog for new weekly updates for e-commerce sellers.
Please don’t leave! Take a moment to read up on our previous post: Telfar Suing Amazon Sellers
Telfar is Suing E-Commerce Sellers Due to Trademark Infringement
Telfar is one of the hottest, most affordable designer bags companies on the market today. Accordingly, Telfar bags sell out immediately after their release. And major public figures and celebrities often wear them, like Oprah, Beyoncé Knowles, Dua Lipa, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. As a result, Telfar Clemens and their collections have garnered praise from The New York Times, Vogue, New York Magazine, HYPEBEAST, and The Wall Street Journal.
Consequently, many counterfeit Telfar bags and products exist. Worse, some resellers may not realize the bags they are sourcing could potentially be counterfeit putting them at risk for involvement with this lawsuit. Therefore, you may ask, “How does one tell a real Telfar product from a fake one?”
Our Next topic: Case No. 22-cv-03635 Filed by Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. Telfar Suing Amazon Sellers
You MUST RESPOND in order to have the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) lifted if you are one of the defendants in the lawsuit filed by Telfar. Right now, the TRO prevents you from operating your e-commerce accounts. It also stops you from accessing the money your business has earned via the sale of Telfar goods and all other branded products.
Is this fair? Probably not! However, you must provide an Answer to the court. As detailed in the Summons and Complaint tied to the TRO, if you fail to respond, the next thing that could happen is a Default Judgment – oh no! – wherein liability is assumed, and the court will automatically rule in favor of Telfar. Which would be even more unfair! Avoid this potential outcome by simply giving an Answer.
THE NOTICE YOU RECEIVED IS ABSOLUTELY NOT SPAM!
How to Respond: Telfar Suing Amazon Sellers
All you need to know is this: Our firm consists of a highly qualified team of intellectual property attorneys who will help craft the Answer that will be given to the court. In this response, you may specify your own claims, and most importantly, provide a detailed defense against the accusations specified in the lawsuit regarding the sale of counterfeit Telfar products. Feel free to email us or call (718)-657-7400 for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, be sure to review our blog weekly for new updates and information for Amazon sellers.
Be sure to check out our previous post! Amazon Suing Sellers and Facebook Admins Over Review Manipulation Accusations
Just last week, multiple major media outlets reported on a huge lawsuit filed by Amazon, which is suing upwards of 10,000 Facebook group administrators for writing and/or facilitating fake reviews for e-commerce products. Amazon labels this tactic as “Review Manipulation.”
If you are one of the Amazon sellers named in the lawsuit, then you may be the victim of an unfair accusation. The complaint filed in King County Superior Court, Seattle, alleges that groups like “Amazon Product Review” and “Amazon Varified Buyer & Seller” offered payment and/or refunds to buyers in exchange for writing bogus reviews, or directly sold fake reviews, on Facebook.
This latest tactic by Amazon is negatively impacting thousands of online businesses just like yours.
Reportedly, the most difficult aspect of Amazon’s crusade is that the identity of the Facebook group admins is apparently unknown, which explains why the complaint does not actually name them, it simply refers to the defendants as, “Jane Does d/b/a [doing business as] Facebook groups creators, admins, and moderators.” And yet another roadblock is that many of the FB groups are private and they only admit those who can prove they are an Amazon seller or reviewer.
As a defendant in the case, you, the seller, have had your account suspended for review manipulation. Next, if not already, you will be asked by Amazon for a Plan of Action.
WE ARE HERE TO DEFEND YOU! Our firm has the deep, intricate knowledge and experiential wherewithal to assist in drafting this Plan of Action, and by doing so, we will provide you with the tools to get reinstated as a seller. Stockman & Poropat, PLLC can offer you the services you require to get rid of this ugly, annoying, confusing mess!
Our firm has successfully handled a myriad of cases just like this, so we can say the following with the utmost confidence: Transparency is the key to reinstatement. Our communication strategy with Amazon will be two-pronged in its overall approach: isolate select reviews for removal and demonstrate a full understanding of review policies so as to convince Amazon that such a violation of terms will never happen again.
You deserve a second chance. We will not only help restore your account, but we will help educate you on how to operate your business to prevent this kind of disruption moving forward. In the unfortunate event you are actually sued, our firm can explore your needs to defend the litigation and establish innocence. Feel free to email us or call (718)-657-7400 for more information on this lawsuit. If you found this content helpful, be sure to review our blog weekly for new updates and information for Amazon sellers.
Have you recently received a notice of a lawsuit filed by Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. on behalf of Peanuts Worldwide, LLC (Case No. 22-cv-00502)? And have you been named as one of the Defendants in the case?
If the answer is yes, then we are very pleased you found our page! It would be our great pleasure to offer a little context on just what this lawsuit means for you as a hardworking and honest e-commerce seller.
Typically speaking, online sellers like you become aware of the lawsuit they were named in as a result of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which is to say, after you found out all of the money in your e-commerce accounts has been frozen or withheld because of the suit.
(Arghhh!!! How frustrating!!! Believe us, we know! Even Charlie Brown would sympathize!)
The TRO is accompanied by a Summons and Complaint as well, which sets for the plaintiff’s claims and indicates that you, the Defendant, acknowledge the receipt of the notice, and that you must respond to the court in a timely manner. In order to properly respond to a Federal lawsuit, you are required to file what is known as an Answer. Simple enough! And this Answer is where you may present, in written form, whatever response is necessary to the Plaintiff (Peanuts), including a counter or cross claim and/or any defense.
If you do not respond, a default judgment may be entered against you. Which is where we come in! Call us to avoid a default judgment! The notice is NOT spam!
Based on the notice, Peanuts alleges that sellers based in China and around the world are taking advantage of various trademark leniencies in order to knowingly purvey counterfeit or copyright infringing products on DHgate, Wish.com, Alibaba, eBay, and Amazon (Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. Case No. 22-cv-00502). Unfortunately, your earnings will continue to remain withheld and inaccessible until you resolve the matter.
The Law Office of Travis J. Stockman is committed to serving as your beacon of hope throughout the entire process of this legal nightmare! Our legal strategies are as unique as all of our valued clients’ situations. We are entirely confident our unflagging determination to counter unsubstantiated claims, provide an impenetrable defense, and/or reach a quick and painless settlement will deliver the results you need, as well as the money you absolutely deserve. Contact us ASAP for a free consultation!
Most likely, you are reading this because you were named as a Defendant in a lawsuit (Case No. 21-cv-06159) filed by Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. for the multi-billion dollar sports brand Nike.
You may have even failed to respond to the suit, which equates to a procedural forfeit. But, do not worry! You have landed on the right law firm’s blog!
Most e-commerce sellers receive notice of a lawsuit by way of a Temporary Restraining Order along with a Complaint which has been served prompting a time to respond to the court. A Complaint sets forth a jurisdictional basis for the court’s power, the plaintiff’s cause of action, and a demand for judicial relief. When responding to a Complaint in a Federal lawsuit, you must file what is called an Answer. The Answer sets forth your responses to the plaintiff’s Complaint while providing you with an opportunity to assert any defenses, cross claims and counterclaims.
In this matter, Case No. 21-cv-06159, Answers are past due and default judgment has been entered. From the records available on this case, it appears that not one of the several hundred sellers named in this lawsuit have responded to the court. As a result, a default judgment in the amount of $100,000 has been issued against all sellers.
We understand how easy it is to mistake a serious, legally binding notice like this for spam, but please know, it is absolutely real! In all likelihood, you were previously hit with a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which widely disrupted the core function of your e-commerce business: to sell products and turn a profit. As a result of this lawsuit and following the expiration of the TRO, all of the funds in your accounts will remain frozen until the default judgment is contested, paid in full or resolved by way of settlement.
If you are the recipient of a default judgment based on a failure to respond, you have not reached a dead end. Thankfully, the remedy to the situation is as simple as securing a fully experienced and thoroughly knowledgeable attorney, one who can shoulder your burden and seamlessly communicate with the Plaintiff’s law firm for you, and ultimately reset your e-commerce account back to a healthy, operating, and profitable state.
The Law Office of Travis J. Stockman is here to guide you through the process of developing a tailor-made legal approach to resolving all your issues, and we will do so efficiently and with a smile. We consistently strategize winning solutions for a very satisfied global client list, and we likely have the answers to the questions you have been asking. Do not hesitate a moment longer, contact us today and tell us your story so we can help.
Aquapaw has filed a lawsuit targeting e-commerce sellers who offer consumer products on Wish, AliExpress, eBay, and mainly, Amazon. The lawsuit, brought by Ference & Associates, LLC claims that the collective defendants, located around the world, are working conspiratorially in concert to sell counterfeit Aquapaw products to customers throughout the United States. The case is No: 21-cv-01784 filed by Ference & Associates, LLC in the Western District of Pennsylvania.
Aquapaw is a company that manufactures innovative pet bathing tools and accessories, which are designed to streamline the process of bathing pets. Their most popular item is the Aquapaw Pet Bathing Tool – a wearable spray-scrubber that attaches to a garden hose. Among their many products, Aquapaw also offers the very popular Aquapaw Slow Treater, a silicone licking device with suction cups, which is meant to incentivize dogs to enter and remain in the bathtub so that owners can clean their pet with ease. The brand has received the Best in Show award at the Global Pet Expo and appeared on the television show “Shark Tank,” and garnered media attention from the likes of PureWow, Good Housekeeping, PopSugar, and BuzzFeed.
As a Defendant named in the lawsuit filed by Ference & Associates, LLC on behalf of Aquapaw, we ask that you please understand that you are required to respond. While you may initially believe this is spam, it is most certainly not. We also assume that by this point, you are suffering from the effects of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) – an incredibly disruptive order that prohibits you from conducting business, and which bars you from accessing the funds across all of your e-commerce accounts. All of which is due to the alleged sale of knock-off Aquapaw Slow Treater products.
The Law Office of Travis J. Stockman is ready at the helm with the unique, specialized knowledge required to successfully reinstate you as an e-commerce seller! Consider us your greatest ally, for our combination of tenacity and passion is unrivaled, and our ability to negotiate favorable outcomes in cases just like this one is unmatched. Call us now!
Emoji Company GmbH has filed a lawsuit against a selection of online sellers utilizing Internet Stores and marketplace platforms such as Amazon, eBay and Etsy. The lawsuit claims that several e-commerce entities based in the People’s Republic of China and other foreign locales are purveying unlicensed, unauthorized, and/or counterfeit Emoji Company brand products to consumers in the United States. The case, No: 21-cv-2969, was filed by the law firm Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd.
Founded in 2015, Emoji Company holds the exclusive rights to the registered emoji® trademark and is the creator/owner of one of the world’s largest libraries of icons designed for commercial use. The Emoji Company offers licensing of more than 15,000 icons for television, print, and online purposes, as well as unique icon-development services, for an elite list of clients, including Kellogg’s, Nestlé, Universal Music, Sony Pictures Animation, Nikon, Random House, and more.
DO NOT WORRY if you are one of the Defendants named in this lawsuit!
As one of the Defendants, you have already been issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which no doubt feels like a roadblock to your daily course of business, as it has frozen your e-commerce accounts across digital platforms and/or related to your Internet Stores, and prevented you from conducting consumer sales. The TRO also affects any future sales revenue related to the claim described in the suit, and any other funds you may otherwise earn from the sales of products with brands totally distinct from the Emoji Company.
This disruption to your business can be solved quickly if you have the reasonable and sound advice of the appropriate legal counsel, which is where we come in!
The Law Office of Travis J. Stockman has an unfaltering passion for and knowledge of US intellectual property law, and we have resolved a large volume of cases on behalf of many high-profile clients, wherein we successfully argued against the same or similar claims as described in the Emoji Company lawsuit. Our experience, professionalism, and tenacity will enable you to reinstate your frozen and interrupted online seller accounts, and once again start making money.
We offer free consultations! Contact our firm via phone or email so that we can tailor a legal strategy specifically for your needs and get you results as soon as possible. Our firm specializes in getting industrious online sellers like you back on the marketplace, free and clear of lawsuits, so that you can continue to move forward on the path to financial success. Do the right thing and have the Law Office of Travis J. Stockman on your side!
Swarovski, represented by Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd., has filed a lawsuit against e-commerce sellers: Case No. 21-cv-00714.
Founded in 1895, Swarovski is a globally popular glass, jewelry, and accessories producer based in Austria. The company has an annual revenue of over $4 million and more than 3,000 retail stores across 170 countries. Many iconic celebrities have worn the brand’s jewelry, among them Audrey Hepburn, Marilyn Monroe, and Penelope Cruz; and Swarovski pieces have been featured in a number of acclaimed films, such as Titanic, Black Swan, Moulin Rouge, and Beauty and the Beast.
If you are one of the Defendants named in the suit filed by Swarovski, then by now it is likely you have received a Temporary Restraining Order, which has resulted in frozen accounts and assets related to the sale of so-called “infringing and counterfeit” products manufactured with the company’s branding. Monies generated from the sale of products entirely unrelated to the company in question may also be tied up due to the Temporary Restraining Order. We understand how frustrating this kind of interruption to your business can be, and we want you to know there are solutions at hand.
Above all else, it is always in your best interest to respond. Providing an Answer to the lawsuit decreases the risk of you losing money by a long shot. In effect, issuing a response excludes you from the possibility of receiving a Default Judgment, which is something you definitely want to avoid at all costs. Simply put, a Default Judgment is a fancy term for a judgement issued by the court when a defendant has failed to appear or respond to the lawsuit. In these instances, liability is presumed and the court typically awards the plaintiff hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages. This may be of particular importance if you and your business entity are based in China or another country outside of the United States as our legal system is difficult to navigate and extremely complicated.
The Law Office of Travis J. Stockman is eager to offer you the kind of effective guidance required to appropriately counteract any unproven claims made against you as an e-commerce seller. When major international companies worth billions of dollars leverage a complaint against an independent entrepreneur and small business operator like you, that’s where we come in! You need someone who can successfully resolve your case for you. We want to put the money you made and which you are owed back in your account just as enthusiastically as you do!
Call us for a free consultation. We can help.
Iron Maiden Holdings, Ltd. has filed a lawsuit against a group of online sellers who use platforms like Amazon, eBay, Wish, AliExpress, and Etsy. The suit claims that various e-commerce entities based in the People’s Republic of China and jurisdictions elsewhere are selling unauthorized, unlicensed, or counterfeit Iron Maiden branded products to consumers in the United States. The case, No: 1:21-CV-00631, was filed by AM Sullivan Law, LLC.
Iron Maiden is a Grammy-winning heavy metal band and one of the most famous and influential groups in the entire genre’s history. Throughout their nearly 50 years of activity on the international music scene, the group has recorded more than 70 albums and sold over 100 million copies across the world. Additionally, Iron Maiden has been ranked No. 3 on VH1 Classic’s “Top 20 Metal Bands,” No. 4 on MTV’s “Top 10 Greatest Heavy Metal Bands of All Time,” and No. 24 in VH1’s “100 Greatest Artists of Hard Rock.”
If you are one of the Defendants named in this lawsuit, then you have likely already received a Temporary Restraining Order barring you from conducting sales and freezing the funds in your e-commerce accounts. The Temporary Restraining Order impacts potential revenue generated in relation to the claim specified in the suit, and the remainder of any capital you may potentially collect from sales of different products that are wholly unrelated to Iron Maiden. We understand your frustration and want you to know that this situation can be remedied with the right legal counsel on your side.
The Law Office of Travis J. Stockman has a deep knowledge of infringement laws, and we have won numerous cases involving allegations just like those put forth in the Iron Maiden Complaint. We have worked with many high profile clients to successfully reinstate their ability to collect disbursements interrupted by Temporary Restraining Orders, to seek dismissal from the litigation and have helped our clients overcome a broad array of accusations regarding intellectual property infringement.
Call us for a free and easy consultation. We know you will want to work with us because our firm has an unrivaled ability to develop unique legal strategies for hardworking online sellers just like you. We want to get you back on the e-commerce marketplace making the money you deserve as fast as you do!