Opinion ID: 581353
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Yamaha I

Text: 44 Appellees moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the doctrine of issue preclusion prevented Yamaha-America from relitigating claims under the Tariff and Lanham Acts it had previously raised and lost in ABC. The district court agreed: 45 The issues regarding the Lanham and Tariff Acts in the instant case are identical to those actually litigated and necessarily decided in ABC International Traders. Moreover, the issues here--whether the Lanham and Tariff Acts provide plaintiff a basis to block the goods manufactured by Yamaha Japan--were actually and necessarily determined in ABC. 46 Yamaha Corp. of Am. v. United States, 745 F.Supp. 730, 731-32 (D.D.C.1990) (Yamaha I ). 47 Although the district court concluded that Yamaha-America's arguments as to the validity of the Regulation under the Tariff and Lanham Acts must be dismissed, it concluded that the parties had not adequately briefed the matter of whether Yamaha-America was precluded from arguing that the gray-market goods in this case were physically different from the authorized goods and, therefore, fell into the exception recognized in Lever Brothers Co. v. United States, 877 F.2d 101 (D.C.Cir.1989). 6 It therefore denied defendants' motion to dismiss as to the physical-differences argument. 48 Yamaha-America's claims under the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation, Apr. 2, 1953, U.S.-Japan, 4 U.S.T. 2063 (Treaty of Friendship), and under the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of March 20, 1883, as revised July 14, 1967, 21 U.S.T. 1583, 1629 (Paris Convention), were not addressed by the court in ABC. 7 Article X of the Treaty of Friendship provides that nationals and companies of either party shall be accorded national treatment and most favored nation treatment with respect to obtaining and maintaining patents of invention and with respect to rights in trade marks.... Id. art. X, 4 U.S.T. at 2071. 8 The district court concluded, however, that Yamaha-America was neither a national nor a company of Japan and that it lacked standing, as an American company in the United States, to invoke the terms of Article X. Yamaha I, 745 F.Supp. at 733. 49 Article 2(1) of the Paris Convention extends to the nationals of all countries of the Union--of which both the United States and Japan are part--all the advantages pertaining to the protection of industrial property that each member of the Union extends to its own nationals. 9 Furthermore, Article 2(2) prohibits the establishment of domicile requirements. 10 The district court determined that, as in the case of the Treaty of Friendship, Yamaha-America was attempting to invoke a provision of a treaty intended to protect foreign nationals doing business in the United States. The district court dismissed Yamaha-America's claim under the Paris Convention for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.