3:15-Cv-00401-TMR Doc #: 50 Filed: 02/21/17 Page: 1 of 16 PAGEID
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case: 3:15-cv-00401-TMR Doc #: 50 Filed: 02/21/17 Page: 1 of 16 PAGEID #: <pageID> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON HIGH 5 SPORTSWEAR, INC., : Case No. 3:15-cv-00401 : Plaintiff, : Judge Thomas M. Rose : v. : : H5G, LLC., : : Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff, : : v. : : SELECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY : OF AMERICA, : : Third-Party Defendant. : ______________________________________________________________________________ ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT SELECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 46) ______________________________________________________________________________ This case is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 46) filed by Third- Party Defendant Selective Insurance Company of America (“Selective”). In the First Amended Third- Party Complaint, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff H5G, LLC (“H5G”) alleges that Selective owes a duty to defend and indemnify H5G against High Five Sportswear, Inc.’s claims in this lawsuit. H5G filed an opposition to Selective’s Motion for Summary Judgment, in response to which Selective filed a reply. (Docs. 47–48.) The Motion is now fully briefed and ripe for review. As Selective has established that there is no genuine issue of material fact and it is entitled to summary judgment on all of H5G’s claims as a matter of law, the Court GRANTS the Motion for Summary Judgment and DISMISSES H5G’s First Amended Third-Party Complaint.1 1 The Court acknowledges the valuable contribution of judicial extern Jonathan M. Zalewski in drafting this opinion. 1 Case: 3:15-cv-00401-TMR Doc #: 50 Filed: 02/21/17 Page: 2 of 16 PAGEID #: <pageID> I. BACKGROUND This case arises out of a complaint for trademark infringement and cybersquatting (hereinafter, the “High Five Lawsuit”) filed by Plaintiff High 5 Sportswear, Inc. (“High Five”) against Defendant H5G. (Doc. 1.) As a result of that suit, H5G submitted a claim under its commercial insurance policy with Selective (hereinafter, the “Insurance Policy”). Selective denied the claim, and on February 26, 2016, H5G filed a third-party complaint against Selective. (Doc. 19.) H5G seeks declaratory judgments that Selective has, under the Insurance Policy, a duty to defend and indemnify H5G in the High Five Lawsuit. (Id. at 7.) H5G further seeks damages for breach of contract and the alleged bad faith denial of H5G’s insurance claim. (Id. at 8–9.) Selective filed an Answer (Doc. 22) to H5G’s First Amended Third-Party Complaint on March 14, 2016, and filed the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 46) on September 19, 2016. A. The Insurance Policy The following facts are undisputed by the parties. On June 2, 2015, Selective issued the Insurance Policy to H5G for a policy term from June 4, 2015, to June 4, 2016. (Doc. 46-3, at 179.) The Insurance Policy was the first policy issued by Selective to H5G. (Doc. 46 at 4; Doc. 47 at 1.) The Insurance Policy provides coverage for commercial general liabilities, including coverage for “personal and advertising injury liability.” (Doc. 46-3, at 122.) The Insurance Policy contains the following coverage provisions: COVERAGE B PERSONAL AND ADVERTISING INJURY LIABILITY 1. Insuring Agreement a. We will pay those sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages because of “personal and advertising injury” to which this insurance applies. We will have the right and duty to defend the insured against any “suit” seeking those damages. However, we will have no duty to defend the insured against any “suit” seeking damages for “personal and advertising injury” to which this insurance does not apply. We may, at our discretion, investigate any offense and settle any claim or “suit” that may result. b. This insurance applies to “personal and advertising injury” caused by an offense arising out of your business but only if the offense was committed in the “coverage territory” during the policy period. 2 Case: 3:15-cv-00401-TMR Doc #: 50 Filed: 02/21/17 Page: 3 of 16 PAGEID #: <pageID> (Id.) The Insurance Policy defines “advertisement” and “personal and advertising injury” as follows: SECTION V — DEFINITIONS 1. “Advertisement” means a notice that is broadcast or published to the general public or specific market segments about your goods, products or services for the purpose of attracting customers or supporters. For the purposes of this definition: a. Notices that are published include material placed on the Internet or on similar electronic means of communication; and b. Regarding web-sites, only that part of a website that is about your goods, products or services for the purposes of attracting customers or supporters is considered an advertisement. (Id. at 129.) . 14. “Personal and advertising injury” means injury, including consequential “bodily injury” arising out of one or more of the following offenses: a. False arrest, detention or imprisonment; b. Malicious prosecution; c. The wrongful eviction from, wrongful entry into, or invasion of the right of private occupancy of a room, dwelling or premises that a person occupies, committed by or on behalf of its owner, landlord or lessor; d. Oral or written publication, in any manner, of material that slanders or libels a person or organization or disparages a person’s or organization’s goods, products or service; e. Oral or written publication, in any manner, of material that violates a person’s right of privacy; f. The use of another’s advertising idea in your “advertisement”; or g. Infringing upon another’s copyright, trade dress or slogan in your “advertisement.” . (Id. at 131.) The Insurance Policy’s coverage for personal and advertising injury is, however, subject to certain exclusions. Of relevance to Selective’s Motion for Summary Judgment, the Insurance Policy contains the following coverage exclusions: 3 Case: 3:15-cv-00401-TMR Doc #: 50 Filed: 02/21/17 Page: 4 of 16 PAGEID #: <pageID> 2. Exclusions This insurance does not apply to: a. Knowing Violation of Rights of Another “Personal and advertising injury” caused by or at the direction of the insured with the knowledge that the act would violate the rights of another and would inflict “personal and advertising injury.” . c. Material Published Prior To Policy Period “Personal and advertising injury” arising out of oral or written publication of material whose first publication took place before the beginning of the policy period. i. Infringement Of Copyright, Patent, Trademark Or Trade Secret “Personal and advertising injury” arising out of the infringement of copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other intellectual property rights. Under this exclusion, such other intellectual property rights do not include the use of another’s advertising idea in your “advertisement.” However, this exclusion does not apply to infringement, in your “advertisement”, of copyright, trade dress or slogan. l. Unauthorized Use Of Another’s Name Or Product “Personal and advertising injury” arising out of the unauthorized use of another’s name or product in your e-mail address, domain name or metatag, or any other similar tactics to mislead another’s potential customers. (Id. at 122–23.) B. The High Five Lawsuit On or about May 1, 2015, High Five requested H5G to “cease and desist from any further use of ‘High Five,’ ‘High 5,’ or the handprint in association with [H5G]’s business.” (Doc 1, at 9; Doc 8, at 12.) High Five ultimately proposed a settlement agreement to H5G, but H5G rejected the settlement offer on or about August 20 and August 27, 2015. (Doc. 1, at 9–10; Doc. 8, at 14–15.) On November 6, 2015, High Five filed this lawsuit against H5G in this Court. (Doc. 1.) 4 Case: 3:15-cv-00401-TMR Doc #: 50 Filed: 02/21/17 Page: 5 of 16 PAGEID #: <pageID> High Five asserts six causes of action against H5G premised on the alleged infringement of High Five’s federally registered and common law trademarks (collectively the “High Five Marks”). (Id. at 10– 16.) First, High Five alleges H5G infringed on the High Five Marks in violation of Section 32 of the Lanham Act. (Id.) Second, High Five alleges H5G infringed on High Five’s common law rights in the High Five Marks. (Id.) Third, High Five alleges H5G adopted marks that are likely to be confused with the High Five Marks in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act for false designation of origin. (Id.) Fourth, High Five alleges H5G engaged in the bad faith use of the High Five Marks “by registering and using the high5gear.com domain name” in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d) for cybersquatting. (Id.) Fifth, High Five alleges H5G used marks that are likely to be confused with the High Five Marks in violation of Ohio Rev. Code § 4165 for deceptive trade practices. (Id.) Sixth, and lastly, High Five alleges H5G engaged in unfair competition and misappropriated High Five’s name, reputation, and goodwill in violation of Ohio common law for unfair competition. (Id.) C. H5G’s Insurance Claim to Selective On November 18, 2015, H5G submitted a claim to Selective under the “personal and advertising injury liability” provision of the Insurance Policy. (Doc. 19-4.) In its claim letter, H5G demanded that Selective defend H5G in the High Five Lawsuit because “the Complaint most explicitly alleged personal and advertising injury as stated in the Policy.” (Id.) On December 28, 2015, Selective denied coverage on the basis that High Five alleged trademark infringement and cybersquatting claims that are not covered under the Insurance Policy. (Doc. 19, at 5; Doc. 19-5, at 2.) D. H5G’S Third-Party Complaint Against Selective On February 26, 2016, H5G filed the First Amended Third-Party Complaint, which asserts four claims against Selective. (Doc. 19.) First, H5G seeks a declaratory judgment that Selective has a duty to defend H5G in the High Five Lawsuit against “third-party claims or suits for damages arising out of alleged personal and advertising injuries.” (Id.