Vapor
Last Thursday, Shenzhen Qianhai Phoenix Networks Co., Ltd. (Phoenix Networks) sued Amazon.com Services, LLC and Amazon.com, Inc. (collectively Amazon) for trademark infringement of the plaintiff’s mark on its “surgical-type face masks.” The Northern District of Illinois lawsuit seeks injunctive relief and damages from the e-commerce defendants.
According to the filing, Phoenix Networks is a
“boutique,” privately held company organized under the laws of China.
According to the complaint, it has been in the business of designing,
distributing, and selling products in the United States, including face
masks, since 2017. The plaintiff contends that items it sells “are
popular on the market and its trademark is recognized by consumers.” The
defendants are Delaware companies that conduct business through their
retail sales operation on the Amazon.com marketplace, according to the
complaint.
At issue are the plaintiff’s branded face masks that
bear its “HONRANE” trademark. The plaintiff notes that in light of the
COVID-19 pandemic, the mask market has experienced an “explosion in []
demand and sales.” Yet, the plaintiff contends, “counterfeit
surgical-type mask products have become a serious problem,” and “are
dangerous, insofar as they are being misrepresented as having
characteristics of the genuine product for which they are being
confused.”
The complaint contends that the defendants “frequently
offered to sell surgical-type face masks under listings created by
Phoenix Network’s authorized distributors on Amazon.com for the sale of
HONRANE-branded surgical-type face masks.” This practice, so-called
“tagging-along” is “a special mechanism on Amazon.com under which
sellers tag along another’s listing when the products offered are
identical.”
The plaintiff allegedly observed multiple instances
of “Amazon tagging along listings with HONRANE-branded face masks,” and
conducted test purchases to check the veracity of the advertisement. The
face masks that arrived were not the plaintiff’s products. The parcels
contained a “product qualified certificate” from a manufacturer that the
plaintiff allegedly does not use.
Phoenix Networks argues that
Amazon was using its trademark without authorization “within its product
listings’ titles and prominently on a brand page for the Mark which
also is not authorized by the Plaintiff.” According to the filing, the
unlawful use of Phoenix Network’s trademark is “likely to cause and has
caused confusion, mistake, and deception by and among consumers and is
harming Plaintiff.”
The complaint charges Amazon with two federal
law counts, trademark infringement and counterfeiting, and false
designation of origin, passing off, and unfair competition. A third
state law claim accuses Amazon of violating the Illinois Uniform
Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
The plaintiff is represented by AU LLC.
Source: lawstreetmedia.com
Author:CHRISTINA TABACCO
Editor:Vapor