Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01661/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01661-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:44 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALD C. BRYANT,

Plaintiff,

v.

VAN WALLER & RON BURRIS,

Defendants.

No. 2:16-cv-1661-WBS-KJN

ORDER

Plaintiff Gerald Bryant, a licensed attorney who represents himself, commenced this 

action for trademark infringement and unfair competition on July 19, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) On 

November 22, 2016, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed some of the defendants, and the action now 

proceeds as to defendants Van Waller and Ron Burris only. (ECF No. 10.) In short, plaintiff 

alleges that he is the registered trademark owner of the trademark “POCKETWATCH,” which 

plaintiff has used in commerce in connection with his performing musical group PocketWatch. 

According to plaintiff, defendants Waller and Burris infringed plaintiff’s trademark by using the 

name “Pocket Watch” for purposes of defendants’ own musical group after plaintiff already had 

ownership of the trademark. (ECF No. 1.) 

On November 23, 2016, the Clerk entered defendants’ default, and on January 28, 2017, 

plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff’s motion sought only

injunctive relief and an award of $831.75 in costs. (ECF Nos. 14, 20.) Defendants failed to file a 

Case 2:16-cv-01661-WBS-KJN Document 22 Filed 03/15/17 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

timely opposition to that motion.

However, on March 6, 2017, defendant Ron Burris, proceeding without counsel, filed an 

“answer” to the complaint, which the court liberally construes as an opposition to the motion for 

default judgment and a motion to set aside the Clerk’s entry of default. (ECF No. 21.) In that 

filing, defendant Burris disputes some of plaintiff’s factual contentions, but also represents that 

defendants’ musical group, “Pocket Watch” had ceased to exist on December 23, 2014. (Id. at 2.) 

He further states:

It is true that there was a picture and a Contract on our old website, 

after the band had disbanded, but this was not intentional. Because 

of personal issues and technical difficulties, Van Waller was not 

able to completely dismantle our website until January 15, 2016. 

However, during the periods between Pocket Watch being 

disbanded as a musical group (12/23/14), and our website being 

fully dismantled; we did not perform any music jobs or receive any 

offers to perform music under the name Pocket Watch.

(Id. at 3.) Moreover, he represents that “Ron Burris and Van Waller do assert that we do not 

intend, now, or in the future, to use the name Pocket Watch for any reason.” (Id.)

1

Although the court makes no factual or legal determinations at this juncture, it appears 

that defendants Ron Burris and Van Waller may be willing to stipulate to the injunctive relief 

requested by plaintiff in his motion for default judgment. Given that suggestion, and the 

relatively small amount of costs involved, the court defers ruling on the pending motions and

finds it appropriate to require the parties to meet and confer regarding a potential informal 

settlement of this matter.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The parties shall promptly meet and confer to discuss a potential informal settlement 

of this matter.

2. No later than April 6, 2017, the parties shall file a joint status report addressing the 

 

1

In his filing, defendant Burris at times purports to represent himself and defendant Waller. 

Defendant Burris is cautioned that pro se litigants are only permitted to represent themselves in 

federal court. Unless defendant Burris is an attorney who has been retained by defendant Waller

for purposes of this action, he is not authorized to represent defendant Waller in this court. Thus, 

defendant Waller himself must also sign any future filings made on his behalf. 

Case 2:16-cv-01661-WBS-KJN Document 22 Filed 03/15/17 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

following matters: (a) whether or not the parties have settled the matter; (b) if the 

parties have settled the matter, a proposed deadline for filing a stipulated judgment 

signed by all parties (plaintiff, defendant Ron Burris, and defendant Van Waller) for 

the court’s consideration; (c) if they have not settled the matter, whether the 

scheduling of a settlement conference would be beneficial; and (d) if the parties 

believe that further informal settlement discussions or a settlement conference would 

not be beneficial, whether plaintiff stipulates to setting aside the Clerk’s entry of 

default and proceeding to litigation on the merits.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 15, 2017

Case 2:16-cv-01661-WBS-KJN Document 22 Filed 03/15/17 Page 3 of 3