01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

ORDER

PAGE -1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

PROPET USA, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

LLOYD SHUGART,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. C06-0186-MAT

ORDER ENTERING PERMANENT

INJUNCTION AND ADDRESSING

ORDER FOR IMPOUNDMENT

The Court previously granted defendant’s motion for a permanent injunction and for

impoundment and destruction of infringing articles, but requested that the parties meet and confer

regarding a stipulated order. (Dkt. 165.) The parties were unable to reach an agreement and

submitted individual proposed orders. (Dkts. 168 & 169.) Now, having considered the papers

filed by the parties, the Court ORDERS as described below.

INJUNCTION AND IMPOUNDMENT

Propet USA, Inc., its officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, assignees,

successors-in-interest, and those in active concern or participation with any of them (hereinafter

Case 2:06-cv-00186-MAT Document 174 Filed 01/17/08 Page 1 of 3
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

1

 Shugart should utilize the same type of comparison technique as demonstrated in Exhibit

B to this Order. (See also Dkt. 165 at 7 (stating that Shugart could “utilize the same approach

used at trial; that is, a comparison of each copyrighted image as contained within one of the two

copyright registrations at issue in this case, with the image included on Propet’s website.”))

ORDER

PAGE -2

collectively referred to as “Propet”), are permanently enjoined from: (1) the continued

infringement of defendant Lloyd Shugart’s (hereinafter “Shugart”) copyrighted images contained

within the copyright registrations dated April 10, 2006, as shown in Exhibit A to this Order; and

(2) removing copyright management information from any of Shugart’s digital images in violation

of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) or continuing to use any offending digital

images.

The Court also specifically orders Propet to remove from any websites under its control

the digital images identified in Exhibit B to this Order. The parties shall further proceed as

follows:

(1) Within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, Propet shall provide to

Shugart a representative sample of its current marketing material for evaluation by Shugart.

Within twenty-one (21) days of the receipt of this material, Shugart shall provide to Propet and

the Court a showing as to any images contained within that material that represents either

continued copyright infringement of images contained in Exhibit A to this Order or continued use

of an image in which petitioner’s copyright management information has been removed.1

 Propet

shall then, within twenty-one (21) days of the receipt of Shugart’s materials, submit a response.

In that response, Propet may, for example, dispute Shugart’s offering with proof that the images

were taken by a different photographer. The Court will thereafter review the submissions of the

Case 2:06-cv-00186-MAT Document 174 Filed 01/17/08 Page 2 of 3
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

ORDER

PAGE -3

parties in order to determine whether or not any action should be taken, including either the

impoundment of the marketing materials or the issuance of an order directing Propet to not engage

in future production of the materials.

(2) To the extent Shugart identifies future instances of infringement by Propet or

Propet’s continued use of images in which Shugart’s copyright management information has been

removed, he will continue to bear an initial burden of identification and proof. See supra n. 1.

(See also generally Dkt. 165.) The parties should make every effort to resolve any such issues

informally.

CONCLUSION

The parties are directed to proceed as indicated above. The Clerk is directed to send

copies of this Order to counsel for the parties.

DATED this 17th day of January, 2008.

A

Mary Alice Theiler

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-cv-00186-MAT Document 174 Filed 01/17/08 Page 3 of 3