Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-03024/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-03024-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ace Asphalt of Arizona, Inc.,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Esau Cooper Stanley, dba Ace Paving,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 04-3024-PHX-DKD

STIPULATED PERMANENT

INJUNCTION

The parties have reached a settlement that includes the issuance of a Permanent

Injunction. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Defendant, his officers, directors, agents, employees, representatives, successors,

assigns, and all persons acting in concert with him, or under his direction or authority, are

hereby PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from the following:

(a) After December 15, 2005, and excluding any Yellow or White Page

advertising existing as of the date of this injunction, using the name and

mark ACE PAVING (“Disputed Mark”), or any other mark that is

confusingly similar to the Plaintiff’s trademark ACE ASPHALT in any

state aside from New Hampshire and Massachusetts;

(b) Representing in words or conduct that it or products or services it

provides, offers for sale, sells, advertises or renders are supplied,

Case 2:04-cv-03024-DKD Document 27 Filed 12/02/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 2 -

authorized, sponsored or endorsed by or otherwise connected in any way

with Plaintiff Ace Asphalt;

(c) Paragraph (b) above of this injunction does not prohibit Defendant from

using the Disputed Mark in the states of Massachusetts and New

Hampshire where such use does not result in any false designation of

origin, false or misleading description of fact or false or misleading

representation of fact, which is likely to cause confusion, or to cause

mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of

Defendant with Plaintiff as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval by

Plaintiff of defendant’s goods, services, or commercial activities;

(d) assisting, aiding, or abetting any other person or business entity in

engaging in or performing any of the activities referred to in paragraphs

(a) through (c) above; and,

(e) causing or inducing any other persons or business entities to engage in or

perform any of the activities referred to in paragraphs (a) through (c)

above. 

2. No later than December 15, 2005, Defendant will deliver by facsimile and mail

a signed letter certifying under penalty of perjury and witnessed by a notary that all use of the

Disputed Mark has ceased, excluding use within the states of New Hampshire and

Massachusetts.

3. No later than January 15, 2006, Defendant shall deliver by facsimile and mail a

signed letter certifying under penalty of perjury and witnessed by a notary that all use of the

Disputed Mark and all records using the Disputed Mark have been changed or canceled,

including those records with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors. The terms of this paragraph

do not apply to Defendant’s use of the Disputed Mark within the states of New Hampshire and

Massachusetts.

Case 2:04-cv-03024-DKD Document 27 Filed 12/02/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 3 -

4. Except for payment as agreed in the Parties’ Settlement Agreement, the Parties

shall bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs in this Lawsuit.

DATED this 30th day of November, 2005.

Case 2:04-cv-03024-DKD Document 27 Filed 12/02/05 Page 3 of 3