Ariz. Bd. of Regents v. Doe
Decision Date | 17 August 2021 |
Docket Number | CV-20-01638-PHX-DWL |
Citation | 555 F.Supp.3d 805 |
Parties | ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS, Plaintiff, v. John DOE, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Arizona |
Glenn S. Bacal, Sean David Garrison, Bacal & Garrison Law Group, Scottsdale, AZ, for Plaintiff.
John Doe, Pro Se.
AMENDED ORDER
This is an unusual case. On one side is a major public university that seeks to use our nation's trademark laws in novel ways in an effort to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other side is a deeply unsympathetic John Doe defendant ("Doe") who posted a series of vulgarity-filled messages on Instagram in an attempt to persuade college students to attend maskless COVID-19 parties during the peak of the first wave of the pandemic, whose answer was stricken for litigation misconduct, who stopped participating in this action after his answer was stricken, and whose identify was never discovered during subsequent proceedings. All of this has culminated in the plaintiff, the Arizona Board of Regents ("ABOR"), filing a motion for default judgment that seeks the entry of a permanent injunction against Doe. (Doc. 33.) As discussed below, although ABOR's motivations for bringing this lawsuit are understandable, ABOR has not established that Doe's challenged conduct (however odious it may be) implicates the trademark doctrines identified in ABOR's complaint. Accordingly, ABOR's motion is denied and this action is dismissed.
The facts set forth below are derived from ABOR's complaint. (Doc. 1.) Because Doe has defaulted, ABOR's alleged facts are assumed true, except facts as to damages. Geddes v. United Fin. Grp. , 559 F.2d 557, 560 (9th Cir. 1977).
Arizona State University ("ASU"), which was founded under a different name in 1885, has continuously operated under the "ASU" and "ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY" trademarks since 1958. (Doc. 1 ¶ 9.) ASU owns "numerous ASU, ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY, and ARIZONA STATE federal trademark registrations for a variety of different goods and services." (Id. ¶ 10.)
ASU also owns "the ASU school colors trade dress, consisting of maroon and gold, which it has been using since at least as early as 1898." (Id. ¶ 11.) "ASU's maroon and gold color scheme has been used extensively on merchandise, in advertising and promotional materials, and on ASU's website and social media accounts to designate ASU and its goods and services, such that consumers—especially Arizona consumers—readily recognize maroon and gold as representing ASU." (Id. ) ASU "invests substantial sums annually" to achieve "wide and extensive exposure of the ASU Marks and maroon and gold trade dress to the public in direct association with the University." (Id. ¶ 12.)
ASU also operates an official Instagram account with the username "arizonastateuniversity." (Id. ) The account "prominently features the ASU Marks and school colors trade dress." (Id. )
On or about July 19, 2020, Doe (whose true identity and location are unknown) created an Instagram account under the username "asu_covid.parties." (Id. ¶ 23.) Directly below the username, Doe identified his location as "Arizona State University." (Id. ) In the profile associated with this account, Doe identified his full name as "ASU Coronavirus Parties," identified his title as "Event Planner," and then provided the following blurb: (Id. ¶ 24.)
Also on July 19, 2020, Doe posted the first message on the "asu_covid.parties" account. (Id. ¶ 23.) It provided as follows:
(Id. ) As the complaint notes, this post included "the ASU logo within the body of the message" and was formatted "in ASU's maroon and gold color trade dress." (Id. )
At some unspecified time after he created this post, Doe wrote a comment in the public comment bar that appears next to the post. (Id. ) The comment provided as follows: (Id. )
On July 20, 2020, Doe posted his second message on the "asu_covid.parties" account. (Id. ¶ 25.) Unlike the first message, this message was not formatted in maroon and gold (it was set against a black background, with neon pink and yellow text) and did not include the ASU logo. (Id. ) Its text provided as follows: (Id. )
Doe proceeded to post a series of additional messages on the "asu_covid.parties" account. (Doc. 1-4 at 2-21.) Although the complaint only discusses some of those messages, more are provided in an attachment to the complaint. (Id. ) Notably, none of the later messages prominently featured the colors of maroon and gold and only one displayed the ASU logo. (Id. ) The text of each subsequent message1 is as follows:
• Message Three: (Doc. 1-4 at 2, 5.)
• Message Four: (Doc. 1-4 at 2, 6.)
• Message Five: (Doc. 1 ¶ 26; Doc. 1-4 at 2, 7.)
• Message Six: In the sixth message, in lieu of drafting his own text, Doe provided what appears to be a picture of an article from a newspaper entitled The State Press. (Doc. 1-4 at 2, 8.) The headline of the article is "University plans to punish partying on and off campus." (Id. ) The text of the article begins (before being cut off): "In response to questions about an Instagram page promoting ‘COVID parties,’ the University said it will not tolerate behavior that disregards health protocols." (Id. ) In a lengthy comment appearing next to this post, Doe wrote the following:
They are trying to slander this account. They don't report the threats people have made to purposely come to the party with COVID .... I gave a fake consulate so there is no political backlash for said country. Our company will not name the consulate our party will be at. Just the address when the time comes. CDC Guidelines, Arizona jurisdiction and ASU on campus rules do not apply to foreign soil. We will be violating nothing. ASU will not be able to punish you. There will be security at the party. EXPRESS YOUR FREEDOM. LET'S PARTY. FIRST SATURDAY OF 2020 FALL SEMESTER. Prohibiting masks is for the safety of everyone at parties. We do not want people committing crimes because they feel empowered by anonymity. We don't think COVID itself was a hoax. We believe the idea that COVID was especially bad in the United States is a hoax.... Our company has an excellent insurance policy. Anything broken in the consulate will be replaced. We will pay the medical bills of any of the Consulate staff who catch COVID-19 within 14 days of the party. Partygoers, however, will have to sign a waiver before entry. We will not release the names of people who sign waivers to the University under any circumstance.
(Id. at 8.)
• Message Seven: This message included two different statements, set off from each other. One provided: The other provided: "You're not pissed at those people?!" (Doc. 1-4 at 2, 9.)
• Message Eight: (Doc. 1-4 at 2, 10-11.)
• Message Nine: (Doc. 1-4 at 2, 12.)
• Message Ten: (Doc. 1-4 at 2, 13.)
• Message Eleven: (Doc. 1 ¶ 27; Doc. 1-4 at 2, 14.) Doe also wrote the following comment in the public comment bar that appears next to this post: (Id. )
• Message Twelve...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic v. Bureau of Land Mgmt.
... ... 2008) ). 378 Id. (quoting 198 F. Supp. 2d 1139, 1152 (D. Ariz. 2002) ); see also id. at 743 n.6 ("District courts in this circuit follow the standard articulated by Rumsfeld ... "). 379 Id. 380 Id ... ...
-
Mountains of Spices LLC v. Lihong
...claims-perhaps the most important among the Eitel factors-are usually considered together. See, e.g., Ariz. Bd. of Regents v. Doe, 555 F.Supp.3d 805, 816 (D. Ariz. 2021). These factors require a court to consider “whether the plaintiff has stated a claim on which it may recover.” Id. (clean......