Source: http://wi.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20191023_0001807.WWI.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2020-08-12 10:16:39
Document Index: 374981270

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1125', '§ 1125', '§ 1331', '§ 1292', '§ 1292', '§ 1292', '§ 1292']

Donald Schott, Anita Marie Boor, QUARLES & BRADY, LLP, Christopher A. Cole, David Ervin, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Holly Melton, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Attorneys for Plaintiff MillerCoors, LLC
PLAINTIFF MILLERCOORS, LLC'S CIRCUIT RULE 3(C)(1) DOCKETING STATEMENT
Plaintiff MillerCoors, LLC (“MillerCoors”) respectfully submits this Docketing Statement pursuant to Circuit Rule 3(c)(1) of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
MillerCoors brought this lawsuit against Defendant Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC (“AB”) in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin on March 21, 2019, alleging that AB's actions constitute false advertising and trademark dilution under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) and 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c). (Dkt. 1). The district court has subject matter jurisdiction over MillerCoors Lanham Act claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
MillerCoors moved for a preliminary injunction on March 28, 2019. (Dkt. 8). On May 24, 2019, the district court entered an Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part MillerCoors motion for preliminary injunction. (Dkt. 57). As part of that Opinion and Order, the district court invited additional briefing on the issue of whether the injunction should encompass AB's packaging.
On September 4, 2019, the district court entered a second Opinion and Order enjoining AB from using previously enjoined statements on its packaging. (Dkt. 102). On September 6, 2019, the district court modified its September 4 Opinion and Order to require compliance by November 1, 2019. (Dkt. 115).
On October 23, 2019, on limited remand pursuant to an interim order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the district court entered a separate Preliminary Injunction Order encompassing the May 24 advertising injunction and the September 4 packaging injunction, as modified on September 6. (Dkt. 189).
On October 23, 2019, contemporaneously with this Docketing Statement, MillerCoors filed a Notice of Appeal from those portions of the district court's October 23, 2019 Preliminary Injunction Order that denied in part MillerCoors motion for a preliminary injunction for the reasons stated in the district court's May 24 Opinion and Order.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has jurisdiction over MillerCoors appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). Under § 1292(a)(1), any order granting or denying a preliminary injunction is an immediately appealable interlocutory order. See Timberlake v. Oppenheimer & Co., 729 F.2d 515, 518 (7th Cir. 1984) (“28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) authorizes the immediate appeal of orders granting or denying preliminary injunctions”); see also Kiel v. City of Kenosha, 236 F.3d 814, 815 (7th Cir. 2000) (reviewing denial of motion for injunction as an immediate interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1)). MillerCoors anticipates proposing a briefing schedule limited to issues not already briefed in the prior appellate proceedings described in Section III.
This is not a direct appeal from a decision of a magistrate judge. No Rule 59 motion or any other motion claiming to toll the time within which to appeal has been filed.
III. Prior or Related Appeals
There have been three prior appeals in this case.
First, on June 24, 2019, MillerCoors appealed from the district court's May 24 Opinion and Order. That appeal was docketed as No. 19-2200 and was expedited, ...