Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-02508/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-02508-3/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 

Acushnet Company, a Delaware 

corporation, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

Thomas Allan Thiede a/k/a Thomas 

Thiede a/k/a Tom Thiede a/k/a Tom T., 

an individual, d/b/a Showcase Studios 

d/b/a Showcase Companies d/b/a 

Showcase Architectural Products d/b/a 

Showcase Custom Homes, Inc. d/b/a 

Makeovermygaragedoor.com; Dualwin 

Sporting Goods Co., Ltd., an 

unincorporated foreign business entity; 

Does 1-5 and Does 7-10, 

 Defendants. 

No. CV 12-02508-PHX-JAT 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR (1) 

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING 

ORDER; (2) ORDER RESTRAINING 

THE TRANSFER OF ASSETS TIED 

TO THE COUNTERFEITING 

OPERATION; AND (3) ORDER TO 

SHOW CAUSE WHY A 

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 

SHOULD NOT ENTER 

[FILED UNDER SEAL] 

 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application for: (1) a temporary 

restraining order; (2) an order restraining the financial accounts tied to the 

counterfeiting operation; and (3) an order to show cause why a preliminary injunction 

should not issue. (Doc. 33). 

I. BACKGROUND 

A. Plaintiff Acushnet Company (“Acushnet”) is the owner of all rights in and 

to the following trademarks protected by the following United States Federal 

Trademark Registrations: 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 1 of 9
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 

Trademark Registration 

Number 

Registration 

Date Class(es)/Goods 

2,620,432 September 

17, 2002 

IC 28- Golf clubs and accessories, 

namely golf tees, golf gloves, golf 

bags, golf putters, golf drivers, 

golf woods, golf irons, golf green 

repair tools, golf club covers, and 

golf bag covers. 

SCOTTY 

CAMERON 2,525,024 January 1, 

2002 

IC 28 – Golf clubs and 

accessories thereof 

TITLEIST 934,406 May, 23, 

1972 

IC 28- Golf equipment 

comprising golf balls, golf clubs, 

golf bags, golf gloves and golf 

covers 

1,155,766 May 26, 

1981 

IC 28- Golf Equipment-Namely, 

Golf Balls, Golf Clubs and Golf 

Bags. 

3,376,961 February 5, 

2008 

IC 24 – Golf towels 

IC 25 – Clothing, namely, jackets, 

shirts, hats and visors 

IC 28 – Golf equipment, namely, 

golf putters, golf club head 

covers, golf club grips and divot 

tools 

TOUR RAT 4,189,312 August 14, 

2012 

IC 28 – Golf balls; golf putter 

covers 

These trademarks are registered in International Class 28 and are used in connection 

with the manufacture and distribution of, among other things, high quality golf club 

headcovers. Additionally, Acushnet is the owner of all common law rights in and to the 

JUNKYARD DOG and SCOTTY’S CUSTOM SHOP marks as associated with 

clothing, including shirts and golf club headcovers (the above-identified common law 

and registered marks shall collectively be referred to herein as the “Acushnet Marks”). 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 2 of 9
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 

B. Plaintiff sells and otherwise distributes its respective high quality 

products, including golf club headcovers and clothing products, in the United States, in 

particular Arizona. Based on Plaintiff’s allegations, it appears Defendant has the 

requisite minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction. 

C. Defendant is Dualwin Sporting Goods Co., Ltd. (“Dualwin” or 

“Defendant”) 

D. Plaintiff has proffered sufficient evidence to show that Defendant has 

manufactured, advertised, promoted, offered for sale, and/or distributed, golf club 

headcovers and clothing products, including shirts, using labeling with counterfeits, 

reproductions, and/or colorable imitations of the Acushnet Marks. 

E. Defendant is not now, nor has it ever been, authorized or licensed to use, 

reproduce, or make counterfeits, reproductions, and/or colorable imitations of the 

Acushnet Marks, or to distribute or sell golf club headcovers and/or clothing products, 

including shirts, bearing counterfeits and infringing versions of the Acushnet Marks. 

II. ANALYSIS 

Pursuant to the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.) as amended by the 

Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984, Public Law 98-473, and Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 65, this Court is authorized to grant Plaintiff’s motion. Further, the Court 

finds Defendant has the requisite minimum contacts within this district for the Court to 

have the jurisdiction to apply the Lanham Act. See Reebok Int’l Ltd. v. Marnatech 

Enters., Inc., 970 F.2d 552, 558-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (Reebok Int’l) (affirming 

extraterritorial application of the Lanham Act); Ocean Garden, Inc. v. Marketrade Co. 

Inc., 953 F.2d 500, 503-504 (9th Cir. 1991) (same). Considering 15 U.S.C. § 

1116(d)(4)(B) and the factors the Ninth Circuit has established for granting preliminary 

injunction relief, see Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky, 586 F.3d 1109, 1127 (9th Cir. 2009), the 

Court finds: 

A. Plaintiff has a very strong probability of proving at trial that consumers 

are likely to be confused by Defendant’s manufacturing, advertisement, promotion, 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 3 of 9
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 

 4 

sale, offer for sale, and/or distribution of golf club headcovers and clothing products, 

including shirts, bearing counterfeits, reproductions, and/or colorable imitations of the 

Acushnet Marks. 

B. Plaintiff is likely to suffer an immediate and irreparable injury if a 

temporary restraining order is not granted. It clearly appears from the following specific 

facts, as set forth in Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint and the sworn Declarations on file, 

that immediate and irreparable loss, damage, and injury will result to Plaintiff and to 

consumers before Defendant can be heard in opposition unless Plaintiff’s request for ex 

parte relief is granted: (1) Defendant has offered for sale golf club headcovers and 

clothing products, including shirts, bearing counterfeit and infringing trademarks in 

violation of Plaintiff’s rights; (2) Plaintiff has well-founded fears that more counterfeit 

and infringing products bearing its trademarks will appear in the marketplace; that 

consumers may be misled, confused, and disappointed by the quality of these products, 

resulting in the consequent injury to Plaintiff’s reputation and goodwill; and that 

Plaintiff may suffer loss of sales for its genuine products; and (3) Plaintiff has wellfounded fears that if it proceeds on notice to Defendant on this Application, Defendant 

will secret, conceal, destroy, sell off, or otherwise dispose of his counterfeit and 

infringing goods, software and equipment used to manufacture the counterfeit and 

infringing goods, packaging, and records relating thereto in his possession and/or 

inform his suppliers and others of Plaintiff’s claims with the result that those suppliers 

and others may also secret, conceal, sell off, or otherwise dispose of counterfeit or 

infringing goods, equipment used to manufacture the counterfeit and infringing goods, 

packaging, and records relating thereto in their possession and control. 

C. The balance of potential harm to Defendant if a temporary restraining 

order is issued is far outweighed by the potential harm to Plaintiff if it is not issued. 

D. The public interest favors issuance of the temporary restraining order in 

order to protect Plaintiff’s trademark interests and protect the public from being 

defrauded by the palming off of counterfeit goods as Plaintiff’s genuine goods. 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 4 of 9
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 

 5 

III. TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER 

Plaintiff’s application for an ex parte temporary restraining order is granted as 

follows: 

Defendant, its respective officers, directors, employees, agents, subsidiaries, 

distributors, and all persons in active concert or participation with any of them are 

hereby temporarily restrained: 

A. From manufacturing, advertising, promoting, offering to sell, selling, 

distributing, or transferring any products, product packaging, software, embroidery 

patterns, or labeling bearing the Acushnet Marks identified in section IA above, or any 

confusingly similar marks, other than those actually manufactured and distributed by 

Plaintiff; 

B. From communicating, directly or indirectly, with any person or persons 

(a) from whom Defendant purchased or obtained products, materials, software or 

embroidery patterns used to counterfeit and infringe the Acushnet Marks identified in 

section IA above above; or (b) to whom Defendant sold or offered to sell its finished 

products; or (c) whom Defendant knows or reasonably believes to possess, control, or 

have access to any such products, materials, software or embroidery patterns; 

C. From otherwise communicating, directly or indirectly, with any person(s) 

about this action, or Plaintiff’s Application for this Order, except for Defendant’s 

attorneys; 

D. From secreting, concealing, destroying, selling off, transferring, or 

otherwise disposing of: (a) any products or product packaging not manufactured or 

distributed by Plaintiff bearing the Acushnet Marks, or any confusingly similar marks; 

or (b) any documentary or electronic records or similar evidence, software, embroidery 

patterns and/or equipment relating to the manufacture, sale, offer for sale, distribution, 

or transfer of any patterns, products or product packaging bearing any of the Acushnet 

Marks or colorable imitations thereof. 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 5 of 9
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 

 6 

E. From knowingly instructing, aiding, or abetting any other person or 

business entity in engaging in any of the activities referred to in paragraphs A through 

D of this section. 

IV. ORDER RESTRAINING TRANSFER OF ASSETS 

In order to preserve the status quo and under the authority granted to this Court 

by 15 U.S.C. § 1117 to freeze the assets of a defendant under the Lanham Act, see 

Reebok Int’l Ltd. v. Marnatech Enters., Inc., 737 F. Supp. 1521, 1526 (S.D. Cal. 1989); 

see also Reebok Int’l, 970 F.2d at 558-61 (affirming district court’s authority to freeze 

assets granted by the Lanham Act), Plaintiff’s application for an ex parte order 

restraining the transfer of assets is granted as follows: 

A. Prior to having Defendant’s assets frozen, Plaintiff shall serve this Order 

on PayPal, Inc. (“PayPal”) and any related companies and affiliates as described in 

paragraph D of this section. 

B. Upon service of this Order by Plaintiff, PayPal and any related companied 

and affiliates, shall immediately restrain and limit all accounts controlled and/or used 

by the Defendant and/or his aliases identified in section I(C) above and/or in the name 

of Dualwin Sporting Goods Co., Ltd., dualwin@yahoo.cn, and/or 

xihaianshancheng@126.com. 

C. PayPal shall further, within five (5) days of receiving this Order, provide 

Plaintiff’s counsel with all data which identifies the accounts frozen as well as an 

accounting of the funds in the restrained accounts. Such restraint of the accounts and 

the disclosure of the related financial institution account information shall be made 

without prior notice to the account owners or the financial institutions until further 

order of this Court. 

D. Any financial institutions, and any related companies and affiliates, 

including those identified by PayPal in connection with paragraphs B or C in this 

section, (the “Financial Institutions”), which hold funds on behalf of or derived from 

Defendant’s business, upon receipt of notice of this Order, shall immediately restrain 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 6 of 9
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 

 7 

and limit all accounts controlled and/or used by Defendant and/or its aliases identified 

in section I(C) above and/or in the name of Dualwin Sporting Goods Co., Ltd., 

dualwin@yahoo.cn, and/or xihaianshancheng@126.com. 

E. The Financial Institutions shall further, within five (5) days of receiving 

this Order, provide Plaintiff’s counsel with all data which identifies the accounts 

restrained as well as an accounting of the funds in the restrained accounts. Such 

restraint of the accounts and the disclosure of the related financial institution account 

information shall be made without prior notice to the account owners or the financial 

institutions until further order of this Court. 

F. Within five (5) days of serving PayPal and any other Financial 

Institutions under paragraph D of this section, but no later than Wednesday, January 2, 

2013, Plaintiff shall give notice to the Court identifying all accounts affected by this 

section and the amount(s) of assets restrained and limited in those accounts. 

G. Plaintiff shall maintain its previously posted bond in the amount of 

$10,000.00 as payment of damages to which Defendant may be entitled for a wrongful 

injunction or restraint, during the pendency of this action, or until further Order of the 

Court. In the Court’s discretion, the bond may be subject to increase should the amount 

of the funds seized exceed $10,000.00. 

V. ORDER SETTING PRELIMINARY-INJUNCTION HEARING 

Plaintiff’s application for an ex parte order for Defendant to show cause why a 

preliminary injunction should not issue is granted as follows: 

A. Based upon the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint and motion, the Court finds 

Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief. Therefore, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 65(b)(3) Defendant is hereby ordered to appear to show cause why an order 

should not issue granting the injunctive relief requested in Plaintiff’s motion before the 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 7 of 9
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 

 8 

Court in the United States Courthouse located at 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, 

Arizona, in Courtroom 503 on Tuesday, January 8, 2013, at 2 p.m. MST.1

B. Further, Defendant shall respond in writing opposing Plaintiff’s motion 

and explain why a preliminary-injunction should not issue. Defendant’s Response shall 

be filed with the Court and served on counsel for Plaintiff within five (5) days after 

being served with this Order. Plaintiff shall file a Reply with the Court and serve it on 

the Defendant within two (2) days of Defendant filing his Response with the Court but 

no later than Wednesday, January 2, 2013.

C. If Defendant does not respond in writing to Plaintiff’s motion within five 

(5) days of being served with this Order or if Defendant fails to appear at the hearing set 

for Tuesday, January 8, 2013, the Court will deem either failure to be Defendant’s 

consent to the motion being granted. See LR Civ 7.2(i). 

D. Service or delivery of copies of this order and the papers in support 

thereof on Defendant to Defendant’s known e-mail address, dualwin@yahoo.cn or via 

postal mail to Defendant’s known physical address, No. 22 Ren Min Road, MinHang 

District, Shanghai, China, shall be given and as so given shall be deemed good and 

sufficient service thereof. 

VI. CONCLUSION 

Based on the foregoing: 

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Emergency Ex Parte Motion for (1) a 

temporary restraining order; (2) an order restraining the financial accounts tied to the 

counterfeiting operation, and upon expiration of the temporary restraining order, a 

preliminary injunction; and (3) an order to show cause why a preliminary injunction 

should not issue (Doc. 33). 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendant Dualwin Sporting Goods Co., Ltd. 

 

1 The Court recognizes this date is outside the 14 day window per Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 65(b)(2). However, due to the holiday season this is the first available date 

before the Court. If Defendant deems this date too far in the future, Defendant may 

move to be heard sooner under Rule 65(b)(4). 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 8 of 9
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 

 9 

shall file with the Court and serve on counsel for Plaintiff within five (5) days after 

being served with this Order, a Compliance Report in writing and under oath, setting 

forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendant has complied with this Order. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, as explained in section V of this Order, the 

Plaintiff and Defendant Dualwin Sporting Goods Co., Ltd. shall appear before the Court 

on Tuesday, January 8, 2013, at 2 p.m. MST, in Courtroom 503, and Defendant 

Dualwin Sporting Goods Co., Ltd. shall show cause why a preliminary injunction 

should not issue. 

 Dated this 20th day of December 2012 

Copies to only: Counsel for Plaintiff 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 34 Filed 12/20/12 Page 9 of 9