Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_15-cv-01406/USCOURTS-azd-2_15-cv-01406-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Best Western International Incorporated,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

KKR LLC, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-15-01406-PHX-SMM

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Best Western International, Inc.’s, (“Best 

Western”) Motion for Default Judgment. (Doc. 16.) Best Western consented to magistrate 

judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), and this case was referred to Magistrate 

Judge Bade. (Doc. 8.) However, because Defendants have not appeared or consented to 

magistrate judge jurisdiction, Magistrate Judge Bade proceeded by Report and 

Recommendation (“R & R”) to this Court. (Doc. 18.) See General Order 11-03. To date, 

no objections have been filed. 

STANDARD OF REVIEW

 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v. 

Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the 

service of a copy of the Magistrate’s recommendation within which to file specific 

written objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to 

object to a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo

Case 2:15-cv-01406-BSB Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - 

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 

review of the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings and waives all objections to those 

findings on appeal. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure 

to object to a Magistrate Judge’s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the 

propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal.” Id. 

DISCUSSION

 Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and no 

Objections having been made by any party thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and 

adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 

CONCLUSION

 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth, 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court adopts the Report and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 18.) 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff Best Western’s Motion for 

Default Judgment (Doc. 16) on Counts One, Three, Four, Six, and Seven, and 

DENYING the motion as to Counts Two, Five, and Counts Eight through Twelve. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on Counts One, Three, and Four of the 

Complaint, judgment shall be entered against each Defendant in the amount of 

$24,480.34. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on Count Six of the Complaint, judgment 

shall be entered against each Defendant in the amount of $387,601.37. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Best Western be awarded attorneys’ fees, 

costs, and expenses to be paid by Defendants in the amount of $5,519.80 ($4,251.50 in 

attorneys’ fees and $1,268.30 in costs). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Best Western be granted a permanent 

injunction against Defendants and their respective officers, members, agents, servants, 

and employees, and any other persons and entities acting on behalf of or in concert with 

Defendants, (1) to immediately and permanently remove all Best Western Symbols as 

Case 2:15-cv-01406-BSB Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 2 of 3
- 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 

used on the premises of, or in reference to, the Hotel, including (without limitation) 

signage, the curvilinear signage cabinets or any other display or items bearing any of the 

Best Western Symbols, and (2) to reimburse costs incurred by Best Western to cause the 

removal of the same should Defendants fail to do so within ten (10) days of the date of 

this Order. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Best Western be granted a permanent 

injunction against Defendants and any other persons and entities acting on behalf of or in 

concert with Defendants, (1) to immediately notify all advertisers, search engines, and 

providers of related services that Defendants are not affiliated with Best Western and are 

required to cause the cessation of all advertising and distribution of promotional material 

containing any of the Best Western Symbols, any colorable imitation thereof, or any 

other confusingly similar marks, and (2) enjoining Defendants and any other persons and 

entities acting on behalf of or in concert with Defendants or advertising Defendants’ hotel 

property from using any such marks (or any imitations or marks confusingly similar 

thereto) anywhere on the Internet or elsewhere, including without limitation any use on or 

with any websites, domain names, metatags, keywords, banner ads, or search engines. 

 Dated this 29th day of February, 2016. 

Honorable Stephen M. McNamee

Senior United States District Judge

Case 2:15-cv-01406-BSB Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 3 of 3