Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02304/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02304-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1051 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 

J. Andrew Coombs (SBN 123881) 

andy@coombspc.com 

Annie S. Wang (SBN 243027) 

annie@coombspc.com 

J. Andrew Coombs, A P. C. 

517 East Wilson Avenue, Suite 202 

Glendale, California 91206 

Telephone: (818) 500-3200 

Facsimile: (818) 500-3201 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. 

Faisal M. K. Alomari, also known 

as Mohamed Kaid Alomari, an 

individual and d/b/a Richmond 

Smoke Shop 

abdo.faisal@yahoo.com 

3049 Cutting Boulevard 

Richmond, California 94804 

Telephone: (510) 235-9285 

Defendant, in pro se 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO 

Nike, Inc., 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Faisal M. K. Alomari, also known Faisal 

Mohamed Kaid Alomari, an individual and d/b/a 

Richmond Smoke Shop, et al. 

 Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C 09-2304 VRW 

[PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION 

The Court, having read and considered the Joint Stipulation re Entry of Proposed Consent 

Decree that has been executed by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. (“Nike” or “Plaintiff”) and Defendant Faisal M. 

K. Alomari, also known Faisal Mohamed Kaid Alomari, an individual and d/b/a Richmond Smoke 

Shop (“Defendant”) in this action:

 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, THE COURT ORDERS that this 

Permanent Injunction shall be and is hereby entered in the within action as follows: 

Nike v. Alomari, et al.: Proposed Consent Decree (Alomari) - 1 - 

Case 3:09-cv-02304-VRW Document 37 Filed 06/11/10 Page 1 of 7
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 

Nike v. Alomari, et al.: Proposed Consent Decree (Alomari) 

1) This Court has jurisdiction over the parties to this action and over the subject matter hereof 

pursuant to pursuant to the provisions of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq., as well as 28 

U.S.C. § 1338(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 

2) Service of process was properly made on the Defendant. 

3) Nike owns or controls the pertinent rights in and to the trademarks listed in Exhibit “A” 

attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (The trademarks identified in Exhibit “A” 

are collectively referred to herein as the “Nike Trademarks”). 

4) Nike alleges Defendant has made unauthorized uses of the Nike Trademarks or substantially 

similar likenesses or colorable imitations thereof. 

5) Any and all of Defendant’s counterclaims asserted against Plaintiff are dismissed with 

prejudice. 

6) Defendant and his agents, servants, employees and all persons in active concert and 

participation with him who receive actual notice of the Injunction are hereby restrained and 

enjoined, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116, from: 

a) Infringing the Nike Trademarks, either directly or contributorily, in any manner, by: 

i) Importing, manufacturing, distributing, advertising, selling and/or offering for 

sale any unauthorized products which picture, reproduce, copy or use the likenesses 

of or bear a confusing similarity to any of the Nike Trademarks (“Unauthorized 

Products”); 

ii) Importing, manufacturing, distributing, advertising, selling and/or offering for 

sale in connection thereto any unauthorized promotional materials, labels, packaging 

or containers which picture, reproduce, copy or use the likenesses of or bear a 

confusing similarity to any of the Nike Trademarks; 

iii) Engaging in any conduct that tends falsely to represent that, or is likely to 

confuse, mislead or deceive purchasers, Defendant’s customers and/or members of 

the public to believe, the actions of Defendant, the products sold by Defendant, or 

- 2 -

Case 3:09-cv-02304-VRW Document 37 Filed 06/11/10 Page 2 of 7
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 

Defendant himself is connected with Nike, is sponsored, approved or licensed by 

Nike, or is affiliated with Nike; 

iv) Affixing, applying, annexing or using in connection with the importation, 

manufacture, distribution, advertising, sale and/or offer for sale or other use of any 

goods or services, a false description or representation, including words or other 

symbols, tending to falsely describe or represent such goods as being those of Nike. 

7) Defendant is ordered to deliver for destruction all Unauthorized Products, including 

footwear, and labels, signs, prints, packages, dyes, wrappers, receptacles and advertisements relating 

thereto in their possession or under their control bearing any of the Nike Trademarks or any 

simulation, reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitations thereof, and all plates, molds, heat 

transfers, screens, matrices and other means of making the same. 

8) Except for the allegations contained herein, the claim alleged in the First Amended 

Complaint against Defendant Alomari, only, by Nike are dismissed with prejudice. 

9) This Consent Decree shall be deemed to have been served upon Defendant at the time of its 

execution by the Court. 

10) The Court finds there is no just reason for delay in entering this Injunction and, pursuant to 

Rule 54(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court directs immediate entry of this 

Permanent Injunction against Defendant. 

9) The Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action to entertain such further proceedings and to 

enter such further orders as may be necessary or appropriate to implement and enforce the provisions 

of this Consent Decree. 

10) The above-captioned action, shall, upon filing by Plaintiff of the Settlement Agreement, Joint 

Stipulation Re Entry Of [Proposed] Judgment, Proposed Judgment Pursuant to Stipulation, and 

requesting entry of judgment against Defendant, be reopened should Defendant default under the 

terms of the Settlement Agreement. 

11) This Court shall retain jurisdiction over the Defendant for the purpose of making further 

orders necessary or proper for the construction or modification of this consent decree and judgment; 

Nike v. Alomari, et al.: Proposed Consent Decree (Alomari) - 3 -

Case 3:09-cv-02304-VRW Document 37 Filed 06/11/10 Page 3 of 7
/s/ Annie S. Wang June 11, 2010 

Case 3:09-cv-02304-VRW Document 37 Filed 06/11/10 Page 4 of 7
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 

EXHIBIT A

Nike Registrations 

Trademark Registration Number Registration Date 

AIR-SOLE 1,145,812 January 13, 1981 

SWOOSH 1,200,529 July 6, 1982 

NIKE 1,214,930 November 2, 1982 

Nike® and Swoosh® Design 1,237,469 May 10, 1983 

Nike® 1,277,066 May 8, 1984 

Swoosh® Design 1,284,385 July 3, 1984 

NIKE AIR w/Swoosh device 1,284,386 July 3, 1984 

NIKE AIR 1,307,123 November 27, 1984 

Air Jordan® 1,370,283 November 12, 1985 

Swoosh device on shoe 1,323,342 March 5, 1985 

Swoosh device 1,323,343 March 5, 1985 

NIKE w/Swoosh device 1,325,938 March 19, 1985 

AIR JORDAN 1,370,283 November 12, 1985 

AIR MAX 1,508,348 October 11, 1988 

AIR TRAINER 1,508,360 October 11, 1988 

Jump Man device 1,558,100 September 26, 1989 

Nike Air® 1,571,066 December 12, 1989 

AIR SKYLON 1,665,479 November 19, 1991 

AIR SOLO FLIGHT 1,668,590 December 17, 1991 

AIR FLIGHT 1,686,515 May 12, 1992 

AIR DESCHUTZ 1,735,721 November 24, 1992 

Jump Man device 1,742,019 December 22, 1992 

AIR TRAINER MAX 1,789,463 August 24, 1993 

AIRMAX in oval 2,030,750 January 14, 1997 

AIR UPTEMPO in crest 2,032,582 January 21, 1997 

AIR with Swoosh device 2,068,075 June 3, 1997 

NIKE with Swoosh device 2,104,329 October 7, 1997 

ACG NIKE in triangle 2,117,273 December 2, 1997 

Nike® 2,196,735 October 13, 1998 

Nike® and Swoosh® Design 2,209,815 December 8, 1998 

Stylized “B” 2,476,882 August 14, 2001 

NIKE ALPHA PROJECT as 

device 

2,517,735 December 11, 2001 

WAFFLE RACER 2,652,318 November 19, 2002 

PHYLITE 2,657,832 December 10, 2002 

TRUNNER 2,663,568 December 17, 2002 

DRI-STAR 2,691,476 February 25, 2003 

PRESTO 2,716,140 May 13, 2003 

TRIAX 2,810,679 February 3, 2004 

WAFFLE TRAINER 2,893,674 October 12, 2004 

THERMA-STAR 2,960,844 June 7, 2005 

Nike v. Alomari, et al.: Proposed Consent Decree (Alomari) - 5 -

Case 3:09-cv-02304-VRW Document 37 Filed 06/11/10 Page 5 of 7
- 6 -

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 

Nike v. Alomari, et al.: Proposed Consent Decree (Alomari) 

NIKE SHOX 2,970,902 July 19, 2005 

Basketball player outline 2,977,850 July 26, 2005 

NIKEFREE 3,087,455 May 2, 2006 

AIR FORCE I 3,520,484 October 21, 2008 

Case 3:09-cv-02304-VRW Document 37 Filed 06/11/10 Page 6 of 7
Case 3:09-cv-02304-VRW Document 37 Filed 06/11/10 Page 7 of 7