Opinion ID: 506117
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issuance of the permanent injunction

Text: 37 The district court permanently enjoined Sandlin from using the name Century as part of his dba, and from using any yard sign, name, or mark confusingly similar to Century 21's marks and design in connection with his business. The district court's issuance of an injunction to remedy trademark infringement is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Transgo, Inc. v. Ajac Transmission Parts Corp., 768 F.2d 1001, 1021-22 (9th Cir.1985). 38 Injunctive relief is the remedy of choice for trademark and unfair competition cases, since there is no adequate remedy at law for the injury caused by a defendant's continuing infringement. It is the remedy provided by federal and state trademark infringement statutes. 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1116(a); Cal.Bus. & Prof.Code Secs. 14330, 14340, 17200 et seq. In cases where the infringing use is for a similar service, broad injunctions are especially appropriate: 39 Where a name, whether registered as a trademark or not, enjoys an international reputation, the use of any colorable imitation will be enjoined pendente lite under 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1125(a) if the use of the colorable imitation is for a similar service. 40 Citibank, N.A. v. City Bank of San Francisco, 206 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 997, 1009 (N.D.Cal.1980). 41 In light of the likelihood of confusion arising from Sandlin's use of the word Century in offering service very similar to Century 21's, we find no abuse of discretion in the issuance of the injunction.