1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

PENNZOIL-QUAKER STATE

COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SSS OIL CHANGE, INC., ET AL.,

Defendants.

Case No. 09-13646

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT

JUDGE

ARTHUR J. TARNOW

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

PAUL J. KOMIVES

______________________________/

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO SET ASIDE CONSENT JUDGMENT

[12], OVERRULING DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS [24], AND ADOPTING THE

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [23] REGARDING

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR AN ORDER HOLDING DEFENDANTS IN CONTEMPT

OF COURT [21]

Now before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Set Aside Consent Judgment [12] and

Defendants’ Objections [24] to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [23] regarding

Plaintiff’s Motion for an Order Holding Defendants in Contempt of Court. 

I. ANALYSIS

A. Defendants’ Motion to Set Aside Consent Judgment

The parties have briefed the issues raised in the motion. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(f)(2),

the Court will decide the motion without oral argument. 

Defendants’ motion is DENIED. As part of the settlement all counsel signed (included as

Exhibit 1 to Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Set Aside Consent Judgment),

Defendants agreed to pay $10,000 to Plaintiff in four monthly payments of $2,500, with payments

to be made on or by April 15, May 15, June 15, and July 15, 2010. If a scheduled payment was not

2:09-cv-13646-AJT-PJK Doc # 26 Filed 01/07/11 Pg 1 of 4 Pg ID 328
2

made, the full settlement amount became due and payable within two business days. See Plaintiff’s

Response, Exhibit 1. Also, “In the event a scheduled payment... is not timely made or any defendant

breaches the Agreements, Defendants agree to be bound by all of the terms of the Consent

Judgment...” Id.

Defendants failed to make a timely payment by May 15, 2010. Accordingly, they breached

the agreement and the Consent Judgment was properly entered. Moreover, as part of the settlement

that Defendants voluntarily entered into, Defendants “agree[d] to never challenge or attack, in any

way, the terms of this Agreement or the Consent Judgment if entered in any subsequent proceeding

involving one or any combination of the Defendants and/or another entity or facility owned or

controlled by one or any of the Defendants.

Defendants have not cited any law which would support the setting aside of the Consent

Judgment. 

 Accordingly, as Defendants have offered no basis for setting aside the Consent Judgment,

the motion is DENIED.

B. Defendants’ Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation

Defendants’ Objections lack merit. After Plaintiff filed its contempt motion, Defendants

failed to respond. Defendants’ Objections do not address the arguments Plaintiffs raise in the

contempt motion. Defendants fail to demonstrate why they should not be held in contempt and why

the Court should not enter an order that Defendants “deliver to PQS any and all signage, invoices,

window stickers, business cards and other advertising or promotional materials in the possession of

Defendants or under their control bearing any of the PQS Marks and permanently remove or totally

obliterate all of the PQS Trade Dress from the Subject Location, as those terms are defined in and

2:09-cv-13646-AJT-PJK Doc # 26 Filed 01/07/11 Pg 2 of 4 Pg ID 329
3

as required by the Permanent and Final Injunction” and “file with the Court, and serve on PQS

within ten (10) days of entry of such order, a written report, sworn under oath, setting forth in detail

the manner and form in which Defendants have complied with the Order.” See Plaintiff’s Motion

at 1.

Accordingly, the Objections are OVERRULED.

II. CONCLUSION

The Court has reviewed the record in this case, and being fully advised in the premises,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Set Aside Consent Judgment [12]

is DENIED.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge

[23] regarding Plaintiff’s Motion for an Order Holding Defendants in Contempt is ADOPTED and

is entered as the findings and conclusions of the Court. Defendants’ Objections [24] are

OVERRULED.

As specified in the Report and Recommendation, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

Defendants are to deliver to PQS any and all signage, invoices, window stickers, business cards and

other advertising or promotional materials in the possession of Defendants or under their control

bearing any of the PQS Marks and permanently remove or totally obliterate all of the PQS Trade

Dress from the Subject Location, as those terms are defined in and as required by the Permanent and

Final Injunction and to file with the Court, and serve on PQS within ten (10) days of entry of this

order, a written report, sworn under oath, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which

Defendants have complied with the Order. 

A hearing is set on Plaintiff’s Motion for an Order Holding Defendants in Contempt of Court

2:09-cv-13646-AJT-PJK Doc # 26 Filed 01/07/11 Pg 3 of 4 Pg ID 330
4

[21] for January 18, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. Defendants are ordered to appear and show cause as to why

they should not be held in contempt. If Defendants fail to do what has been ordered above, then the

Court will make a finding of contempt and award Plaintiff a monetary sum (in an amount to be

determined) representing Plaintiff’s costs and fees incurred in bringing the contempt motion. 

SO ORDERED.

S/ARTHUR J. TARNOW

Arthur J. Tarnow

Senior United States District Judge

Dated: January 7, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on January

7, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/LISA M. WARE

Case Manager

2:09-cv-13646-AJT-PJK Doc # 26 Filed 01/07/11 Pg 4 of 4 Pg ID 331