Birthright v. Birthright, Inc.
Decision Date | 23 July 1993 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 92-1837(SSB). |
Citation | 827 F. Supp. 1114 |
Parties | BIRTHRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. BIRTHRIGHT, INC. and Birthright of Woodbury, Inc., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Susan Singer, Singer & Goger, Newark, NJ, Roberta Jacobs-Meadway, Panitch Schwarze Jacobs & Nadel, Philadelphia, PA, for plaintiff.
Thomas F. McGuire, III, Pennsauken, NJ, and Robert J. Brooks, Washington, DC, for defendants.
AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW (pursuant to order dated July 21, 1993)
Before the court is a trademark infringement and unfair competition case brought by plaintiff Birthright under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq, and the common law. Count I of plaintiff's second amended complaint states a claim for trademark infringement under Section 32, 15 U.S.C. § 1114. In count II, plaintiff makes a claim of unfair competition under Section 43(a)(1)(A), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A). In count III, plaintiff alleges a claim of false or misleading representations of fact under Section 43(a)(1)(B), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B). Finally, count IV is a pendant state claim of common law unfair competition. Plaintiff seeks injunctive and monetary relief, as well as an award of attorneys' fees. Also before the court are defendants' counterclaims for common law unfair competition, breach of contract, and defamation.
Plaintiff filed suit on April 24, 1992. The court held hearings on the parties' motions for preliminary relief on July 17, August 10, and August 11, 1992. On October 5, 1992, the court, with the consent of the parties, ordered the consolidation of the hearings on preliminary relief with the trial on the merits pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(a)(2). On December 26, 1992, defendants submitted proposed findings of fact and proposed conclusions of law. On December 28, 1992, plaintiffs submitted the same. After careful consideration of the entire record in this matter, the court enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a).
1. The "Birthright" name is a service mark, registered with the United States Patent Office in the name of plaintiff Birthright. The "Birthright" name functions to identify the kind of pregnancy counselling services offered by the entities affiliated with the Birthright movement. Pl.'s Exs. 7, 7A, 7B.
2. The stylized "B" logo is an unregistered service mark that also functions to identify the kind of pregnancy counselling services offered by the entities affiliated with the Birthright movement. The logo consists of the letter "B" in heavy print, surrounding the silhouette of a telephone handset that resembles a fetus. Defs.' Ex. 5 (Louise Summerhill, The Story of Birthright 19 (1973)).
3. Plaintiff Birthright is a Canadian corporation, organized on February 4, 1969 under the laws of Ontario by Louise Summerhill ("mother Louise") and others, with offices in Toronto, Canada. Pl.'s Ex. 19.
4. Mother Louise was the founder and dominating figure in the Birthright movement from its origins until the time of her death in August 1991. II Tr. at 46, 53, 83, 210. At all times relevant to this litigation, mother Louise's actions were taken in her official capacity as a member of the Board of Directors of plaintiff Birthright. II Tr. at 276.
5. Louise R. Summerhill ("daughter Louise") is one of three co-presidents and a member of the board of directors of Birthright. She is the daughter of mother Louise. I Tr. at 24, 31.
6. Defendant Birthright, Inc. is a United States corporation, organized on June 17, 1972 under the laws of New Jersey by mother Louise and others. Defs.' Ex. 1; II Tr. at 209.
7. Joan Evelyn Coleman has been active in the Birthright movement since the summer of 1971 and currently serves on the board of directors of Birthright, Inc. She is also the director of a Birthright chapter in Alexandria, Virginia, and holds the positions of regional consultant and regional representative. II Tr. at 154-55.
8. Denise Cocciolone is the executive director and member of the board of directors of defendant Birthright Inc. and a member of the board of directors of Birthright of Woodbury ("Woodbury Birthright"). Defs.' Ex. 11 ("Aff. of Cocciolone") ¶ 1. She is the leading figure of both Birthright Inc. and Woodbury Birthright, and controls and directs these two entities. II Tr. at 295. Cocciolone first became involved in the Birthright movement in 1970, and she formerly served as the national director for Birthright in the United States. II Tr. at 202.
9. Terry Weaver is a member of the board of directors of Birthright and the national director for Birthright in the United States. She assumed these positions in September 1991. She first became active in the Birthright movement in 1969, when she founded an Atlanta chapter. She has also served as a regional consultant and as a conational director for Birthright. II Tr. at 86, 87, 92.
10. Bernadette Sanders is the director of the Wichita, Kansas Birthright Center, which she founded in 1971. She also serves as a regional consultant for Birthright. II Tr. at 127.
11. Defendant Woodbury Birthright is a United States corporation, organized on November 17, 1975 under the laws of New Jersey. Pl.'s Ex. 58. Its offices are located in Woodbury, New Jersey. Before its incorporation, Woodbury Birthright operated as an unincorporated entity since December 1970. II Tr. at 204. On December 1, 1971, plaintiff Birthright issued Woodbury Birthright a charter document making the latter a "Chartered Member of Birthright" with the right to use the "Birthright" name.1 Woodbury Birthright is located at the same address as Birthright, Inc., and is directed and controlled by Denise Cocciolone. II Tr. at 272, 295; Defs.' Ex. 10; Decl. of Berney, Ex. F.
12. The Birthright movement comprises non-profit, charitable, interdenominational, and non-political organizations that provide emergency services to counsel women with crisis pregnancies. Based on the idea that every pregnant women has the right to give birth and every unborn child has the right to live, the Birthright movement encourages women with unplanned and/or unwanted pregnancies to bear their babies and not to have abortions. I Tr. at 31; Pl.'s Ex. 20 ("Decl. of Daughter Louise") ¶ 6.
13. Formulated in 1971, the Birthright Charter articulates the underlying philosophy and guiding principles of the Birthright movement.2 I Tr. at 36-37; II Tr. at 131.
14. The Birthright Charter also provides the standards that govern the activities of the Birthright chapters. I Tr. at 36-37; Pl.'s Ex. 4 ("Decl. of Birthright Administration") ¶ 5; Pl.'s Ex. 65 ("Decl. of Weaver"), Ex. A.
15. The Declaration of Birthright Administration outlines the administrative structure of the Birthright movement and the relationship among the entities comprising it. I Tr. at 43.
16. Article I of the Birthright Charter states that:
Pl.'s Ex. 1; Defs.' Ex. 10.
17. The Birthright Charter states the following aims for all entities affiliated with the Birthright movement:
Pl.'s Ex. 1; Defs.' Ex. 10.
18. The Birthright Charter articulates the following policies, to which all entities affiliated with the Birthright movement must adhere:
Pl.'s Ex. 1; Defs.' Ex. 10.
19. To supplement and clarify the Birthright Charter, the Birthright Board has the exclusive authority to issue policy directives. These policy directives are "as important as any of the terms of the Charter," and all entities and individuals connected to the Birthright movement...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Children's Health Def. v. Facebook Inc.
...818-19 (9th Cir. 1996) (nonprofit sued defendants for infringement of protected tradename under Lanham Act); Birthright v. Birthright, Inc. , 827 F. Supp. 1114, 1123 (D.N.J. 1993) (Canadian nonprofit provider of services to pregnant women sued American affiliate for false advertising in fun......
-
Gordon & Breach Science Publishers v. AIP
...has been found applicable, for example, to the fundraising letters of a non-profit pregnancy counseling group, Birthright v. Birthright, Inc., 827 F.Supp. 1114, 1138 (D.N.J.1993); to the distribution of marketing information to retailers at a trade show, American Needle & Novelty, Inc. v. D......
-
Digital Equip. Corp. v. Altavista Tech., Inc.
...breached its license, ATI cannot use that license as a defense to an action for trademark infringement. See Birthright v. Birthright, Inc., 827 F.Supp. 1114, 1134 (D.N.J.1993) ("where defendants' previous use of the mark occurred with plaintiff's permission, plaintiff must also establish th......
-
Bracco Diagnostics, Inc. v. Amersham Health, Inc.
...pamphlets by nonprofit organization can be classified as commercial speech); G & B, 859 F.Supp. at 1534-36; Birthright v. Birthright, Inc., 827 F.Supp. 1114, 1138 (D.N.J.1993) (non-profit fundraising letters can be commercial advertising); National Artists Mgmt. Co. v. Weaving, 769 F.Supp. ......
-
Private Remedies for False or Misleading Advertising: Lanham Act Section 43(a)
...Towers Fin. Corp. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc., 803 F. Supp, 820, 824 (S.D.N.Y. 1992). 101. See, e.g., Birthright v. Birthright, Inc., 827 F. Supp. 1114, 1138 (D.N.J. 1993). 102. See, e.g., Nat’l Artists Mgmt. Co. v. Weaving, 769 F. Supp. 1224, 1230-35 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). 103. See, e.g., Abbott L......
-
Table of Cases
...(S.D. Fla. 2011) ), rev’d and remanded , 11-13574, 2012 WL 2913786 (11th Cir. July 18, 2012), 644, 687 Birthright v. Birthright, Inc., 827 F. Supp. 1114 (D.N.J. 1993), 1226, 1300, 1314 Bishop v. State, 526 S.E.2d 917 (Ga.Ct.App. 1999), 266 Bisson v. Ward, 628 A.2d 1256 (Vt. 1993), 1150 Bitt......