Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-01525/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-01525-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Trademark Infringement

---

- 1 - 

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. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

J. Andrew Coombs (SBN 123881) 

andy@coombspc.com 

Annie S. Wang (SBN 243027) 

annie@coombspc.com 

J. Andrew Coombs, A Prof. Corp. 

450 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 600 

Glendale, California 91203-2349 

Telephone: (818) 291-6444 

Facsimile: (818) 291-6446 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. 

Henry O. Schaefer (SBN 168784) 

Taghi Astanehe (SBN 236334) 

Law Offices of Astanehe & Schaefer 

819 Eddy Street 

San Francisco, CA 94109 

Telephone: (415) 771-6174 

Facsimile: (415) 474-3748 

Attorneys for Defendant Ata 

Salem, an individual 

and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports 

Muhammad Salem, 

an individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports, 

 

Defendant in pro se

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

Nike, Inc. 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Ata Salem, an individual and d/b/a 

Rubin’s Imports, Muhammad Salem, an 

individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports and 

Does 2 through 10, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. CV07-1525 SBA 

JOINT STIPULATION RE ENTRY 

OF CONSENT DECREE; 

CONSENT DECREE AND 

PERMANENT INJUNCTION 

WHEREAS, Nike, Inc. (“Nike”), having filed a Complaint in this action 

charging Defendants Ata Salem, an individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports and 

Muhammad Salem, an individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports (collectively 

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 1 of 8
- 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 

Nike v. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

“Defendants”) with liability for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and 

unfair competition, and the parties hereto desiring and having agreed to settle the 

controversy between them. 

Nike and Defendants, by and through their respective counsels of record, 

stipulate and agree as follows: 

1. That a Permanent Injunction and [Proposed] Consent Decree may be 

entered upon the terms set forth below. 

2. Defendants stipulate not to appeal the Consent Decree entered pursuant to 

this Stipulation and hereby waive all rights to appeal from it. Defendants hereby 

waive any rights which they may have to request or to have a new trial or any rights 

which they may have to otherwise challenge, directly or collaterally, the Injunction 

entered pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation, unless there is a breach by Nike of 

the Release and Settlement Agreement and this Stipulation. 

3. Defendants acknowledge that they have completely read the terms of this 

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order and fully understand the terms and consequences 

of the Stipulation and [Proposed] Order. 

4. The waiver by a party to this Stipulation of the performance of any 

covenant, condition or promise herein shall not invalidate this Stipulation nor shall 

any such waiver be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of the performance of 

any other covenant, condition or promise in this Stipulation. 

5. This Stipulation may be amended or modified only by a written instrument 

signed by all the Parties. 

6. The claims for relief, and each of them, alleged by Nike against 

Defendants, shall be dismissed with prejudice. 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 2 of 8
- 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 

Nike v. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

7. This Stipulation shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the Parties 

to it, their successors, heirs or assignees. 

 IT IS SO STIPULATED: 

Dated: ________________, 2007 J. Andrew Coombs, A Prof. Corp. 

 By: __________________________ 

 J. Andrew Coombs 

 Annie S. Wang Attorneys for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. 

 

Dated: ________________, 2007 Law Offices of Astanehe & Schaefer

 By: _________________________ 

 Henry O. Schaefer Taghi Astanehe Attorneys for Defendant Ata Salem, an 

individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports 

Dated: _________________, 2007 

 By: _________________________ 

 Muhammad Salem 

 An individual and d/b/a Rubin’s 

Imports Defendant in pro se 

 The Court, having read and considered the Joint Stipulation for Permanent 

Injunction and Dismissal that has been executed by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. (“Nike”) and 

Defendants Ata Salem, an individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports and Muhammad 

Salem, an individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports (collectively “Defendants”) in this 

action, and good cause appearing therefore, hereby:

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 3 of 8
- 4 - 

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. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

 ORDERS that based on the parties’ stipulation and only as to Defendants, 

their successors, heirs, and assignees, this Injunction shall be and is hereby entered in 

the within action as follows: 

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

matter hereof pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq., and 28 U.S.C. 

§§ 1331, 1338 and 1367. Service of process was properly made against Defendants. 

2) Nike claims that it 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”). 

3) Nike has alleged that Defendants have made unauthorized uses of the Nike 

Trademarks or substantially similar likenesses or colorable imitations thereof. 

4) Defendants and their agents, servants, employees and all persons in active 

concert and participation with them who receive actual notice of the Injunction are 

hereby restrained and enjoined from: 

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

manner, including generally, but not limited to manufacturing, importing, 

distributing, advertising, selling and/or offering for sale any unauthorized 

product which features any of the Nike Trademarks (“Unauthorized 

Products”), and, specifically from: 

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

offering for sale the Unauthorized Products or any other unauthorized 

products which picture, reproduce, copy or use the likenesses of or bear 

a confusing similarity to any of the Nike Trademarks; 

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, 

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 4 of 8
- 5 - 

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. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

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, Defendants’ customers 

and/or members of the public to believe, the actions of Defendants, the 

products sold by Defendants, or Defendants themselves are connected 

with Nike, are sponsored, approved or licensed by Nike, or are 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. 

5) Each side shall bear its own fees and costs of suit. 

6) Except as provided herein, all claims alleged in the Complaint are dismissed 

with prejudice. 

7) This Injunction shall be deemed to have been served upon Defendants at the 

time of its execution by the Court. 

8) 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 Injunction against Defendants. 

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 Injunction. 

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

Agreement, Stipulation for Entry of Judgment and Judgment Pursuant to Stipulation, 

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 5 of 8
- 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. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

and requesting entry of judgment against Defendants, be reopened should 

Defendants default under the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 

11) This Court shall retain jurisdiction over the Defendants for the purpose of 

making further orders necessary or proper for the construction or modification of this 

consent decree and judgment; the enforcement hereof; the punishment of any 

violations hereof; and for the possible entry of a further Judgment Pursuant to 

Stipulation in this action. 

DATED:7/24/07 

 ________________________________ Hon. Saundra B. Armstrong 

Judge, United States District Court, 

Northern District of California 

PRESENTED BY: 

J. Andrew Coombs, A Prof. Corp. 

By: ______________________________ 

 J. Andrew Coombs 

 Annie S. Wang 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. 

Law Offices of Astanehe & Schaefer 

By: ____________________________ 

 Henry O. Schaefer 

 Taghi Astanehe 

Attorneys for Defendant Ata 

Salem, an individual 

and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports 

By: ____________________________ 

 Muhammad Salem, 

an individual and d/b/a Rubin’s Imports, 

Defendant in pro se 

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 6 of 8
- 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. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

EXHIBIT A

Nike Trademark Registrations 

Trademark Registration Number Registration Date 

Nike® 1,277,066 May 8, 1984 

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

Nike® and Swoosh®

Design 

1,237,469 May 10, 1983 

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

Air Jordan® Design 1,742,019 December 22, 1992 

(Class 18 and 25) 

Just Do It® 1,875,307 January 24, 1995 

Nike® 2,196,735 October 13, 1998 

(Class 14) 

Nike® and Swoosh®

Design 

2,209,815 December 8, 1998 

(Class 14) 

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

SWOOSH 1,200,529 July 6, 1982 

NIKE 1,214,930 November 2, 1982 

NIKE AIR w/Swoosh 

device 

1,284,386 July 3, 1984 

NIKE AIR 1,307,123 November 27, 1984 

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 

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 

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

RUNWALK device 1,877,672 February 7, 1995 

STARTER 1,896,998 May 30, 1995 

NIKE GOLF 1,944,436 December 26, 1995 

NIKE REGRIND 2,022,321 December 10, 1996 

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

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

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 7 of 8
- 8 - 

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. Salem, et al.: Stipulation and Consent Decree 

NIKE REGRIND in crest 2,042,940 March 11, 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 

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

NIKE ALPHA PROJECT 

as device 

2,517,735 December 11, 2001 

Ellipses device 2,521,178 December 18, 2001 

STORM-FIT 2,551,655 March 26, 2002 

Baseballer silhouette 

device 

2,571,726 May 21, 2002 

Reverse “Z” in rectangle 

device 

2,584,382 June 25, 2002 

NIKE GOLF with crest 2,628.587 October 1, 2002 

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 

BOING 2,735,172 July 8, 2003 

Swoosh with clubs crest 2,753,357 August 19, 2003 

PRESTO 2,716,140 May 13, 2003 

FOOTENT 2,798,233 December 23, 2003 

FOOTENT in device 2,798,234 December 23, 2003 

TRIAX 2,810,679 February 3, 2004 

R9 2,843,275 May 18, 2004 

WAFFLE TRAINER 2,893,674 October 12, 2004 

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

NIKE SHOX 2,970,902 July 19, 2005 

STARTER 2,971,216 July 19, 2005 

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

STAR FLEX 3,002,455 September 27, 2005 

10//2 in rectangle 3,057,889 February 7, 2006 

NIKEFREE 3,087,455 May 2, 2006 

Case 4:07-cv-01525-SBA Document 17 Filed 07/25/07 Page 8 of 8