CR Associates sued Selfstorage and Sparefoot, Inc. (and a third party, since voluntarily dismissed), alleging state and federal trademark infringement and unfair competition relating to defendants 2019 alleged use of CR 2019s 201cCross Road Storage 201d mark to boost defendants 2019 Google search results and to indicate, on defendants 2019 website, that CR 2019s self-storage facility is unavailable and redirect viewers to other storage sites under contract with the defendants. Judge Sorokin granted Selfstorage 2019s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that Selfstorage merely licensed use of its 201cselfstorage.com 201d domain name to Sparefoot for a licensing fee, which was insufficient to demonstrate purposeful availment of Massachusetts. He granted Sparefoot 2019s motion to transfer pursuant to a forum selection clause in a contract between CR and Sparefoot executed on February 2, 2017, and denied CR 2019s emergency motion to amend its complaint as futile, as nothing in the amended complaint limited the allegations to the period prior to the execution of the agreement. Judge Sorokin rejected CR 2019s argument that the terms of service that included the forum selection clause could not be applied, finding the on-line terms 2019 notification and affirmative requirement of agreement sufficed to render the term enforceable. He likewise rejected CR 2019s argument that the requirement person executing the agreement on CR 2019s behalf lacked authority to bind CR, finding that the person had implied authority to do the acts required to enter into the agreement the company had asked him to enter into, and that the conduct of CR 2019s principal following the execution of the agreement was consistent with having conferred such authority. The case was transferred to the Western District of Texas.
SHARE THIS POST