Amazon Urges Denial of Motion for Oakley Plaintiffs to File a Sur-Reply
Amazon opposes the motion of plaintiff Renee Gabet and her company Annie Oakley Enterprises in their trademark infringement case against Amazon for leave to file a sur-reply opposing Amazon’s motion to strike its outside counsel, Robert Cruzen of Klarquist Sparkman,…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
from the plaintiffs’ witness list (see 2305100028), said Amazon’s opposition brief Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-02246) in U.S. District Court for Southern Indiana in Indianapolis. Plaintiffs and their counsel “are doing it again, wrongly arguing that Amazon has filed an improper reply brief to delay a ruling on a motion that calls out plaintiffs’ improper tactics,” said Amazon. “Amazon filed its motion to strike to remedy plaintiffs’ and their counsel’s harassing and unprofessional conduct,” it said. The plaintiffs and their counsel “now double down with a gambit already soundly rejected by the Northern District of Indiana in this case,” it said. The plaintiffs’ motion for leave “fails to justify a sur-reply and should be denied,” it said. The court also should warn the plaintiffs and their counsel “of certain consequences for continued misconduct,” it said. Amazon’s motion to strike is “ripe for resolution,” and the court shouldn’t “countenance” the plaintiffs’ efforts to delay the court’s consideration of it, it said.