Digital Media Law Project
Published on Digital Media Law Project (https://www.dmlp.org)

Home > Lifestyle Lift Holding, Inc. v. Leonard

Lifestyle Lift Holding, Inc. v. Leonard [1]

Submitted by DMLP Staff on Fri, 05/09/2008 - 13:57

Summary

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Date: 

10/19/2007

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Dismissed (total)

Location: 

Michigan

Verdict or Settlement Amount: 

N/A

Legal Claims: 

False Advertising
Trademark Infringement
Trademark Dilution
In October 2007, Lifestyle Lift Holding, Inc. sued Justin Leonard and his company Leonard Fitness, Inc. for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and false advertising. Leonard runs the forum website infomercialscams.com, which gives consumers the opportunity to voice their criticisms and... read full description
Parties

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Leonard Fitness, Inc.; Justin Leonard

Type of Party: 

Organization

Type of Party: 

Individual
Organization

Location of Party: 

  • Michigan

Location of Party: 

  • Arizona
  • Nevada

Legal Counsel: 

Allan S. Rubin - Draper, Rubin & Shulman P.L.C.; Michael McKinnon; Kenneth Zorn

Legal Counsel: 

Paul Alan Levy - Public Citizen; Barbara M. Harvey
Description

In October 2007, Lifestyle Lift Holding, Inc. sued Justin Leonard and his company Leonard Fitness, Inc. for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and false advertising. Leonard runs the forum website infomercialscams.com [2], which gives consumers the opportunity to voice their criticisms and defenses of various products and services, including the "Lifestyle Lift" cosmetic surgery procedure. The complaint alleged that Leonard infringed and diluted the "Lifestyle Lift" trademark by using it in URLs for his website. It also claimed that he violated federal false advertising law by creating the false impression that the Lifestyle Lift procedure and its associated services were a "scam." See the Complaint at paragraph 18.

In December 2007, Leonard moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him, that his noncommercial use of Lifestyle Lift's trademark for purposes of consumer commentary was protected by the First Amendment, that his use of the trademark was nominative fair use [3], and that Lifestyle Lift had failed to allege a proper trademark or false advertising claim. The court granted Leonard's motion to dismiss during a May 2, 2008 hearing. The record does not indicate whether the court gave Lifestyle Lift permission to amend its complaint.

Update:

According to Public Citizen (Leonard's counsel) Lifestyle chose to pay $17,500 in attorney's fees rather than face the possibility of Rule 11 sanctions.

Related Links: 

  • Wired/Threat Level: Judge Throws Wrinkle into Plastic Surgery Trademark Claim [4]
  • Consumer Law & Policy Blog: The Hazards of Running a Consumer Review Website [5]
  • Consumer Law & Policy Blog: The Hazards of Suing a Consumer Review Website [6]
  • Public Citizen: Entry on Lifestyle Lift v. Leonard Case [7]
Details

Web Site(s) Involved: 

infomercialscams.com [8]

Content Type: 

  • Text

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Subject Area: 

  • Trademark
  • Consumer Ratings and Reviews
  • Sanctions
Court Information & Documents

Jurisdiction: 

  • Michigan

Source of Law: 

  • United States

Court Name: 

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division

Court Type: 

Federal

Case Number: 

2:07-cv-14450

Relevant Documents: 

PDF icon 2007-10-19-Lifestyle Lift v. Leonard Complaint.pdf [9]
PDF icon 2007-11-17-Lifestyle Lift v. Leonard First Amended Complaint.pdf [10]
PDF icon 2007-12-13-Lifestyle Lift v. Leonard Motion to Dismiss.pdf [11]
PDF icon 2008-01-03-Lifestyle Lift v. Leonard Response to Motion to Dismiss.pdf [12]
PDF icon 2008-01-14-Lifestyle Lift v. Leaonard Reply Brief.pdf [13]
PDF icon 2008-05-02-Lifestyle Lift v. Leonard Judgment.pdf [14]
PDF icon 2008-05-02-Lifestyle Lift v. Leonard Order on Motion to Dismiss.pdf [15]
PDF icon 2008-05-07-Public Citizen's Letter Requesting Fees.pdf [16]
PDF icon 2008-05-02-Transcript of Judge's Ruling on Motion to Dismiss.pdf [17]

DMLP Logo


Source URL (modified on 08/20/2014 - 11:06pm): https://www.dmlp.org/threats/lifestyle-lift-holding-inc-v-leonard

Links
[1] https://www.dmlp.org/threats/lifestyle-lift-holding-inc-v-leonard
[2] http://infomercialscams.com/
[3] https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/using-trademarks-others
[4] http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/05/judge-throws-wr.html
[5] http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2007/12/the-hazards-of.html
[6] http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2008/06/the-hazards-of.html
[7] http://www.citizen.org/litigation/briefs/IntFreeSpch/cases/articles.cfm?ID=14267#lifestyle
[8] http://www.infomercialscams.com/
[9] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2007-10-19-Lifestyle%20Lift%20v.%20Leonard%20Complaint.pdf
[10] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2007-11-17-Lifestyle%20Lift%20v.%20Leonard%20First%20Amended%20Complaint.pdf
[11] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2007-12-13-Lifestyle%20Lift%20v.%20Leonard%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[12] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-01-03-Lifestyle%20Lift%20v.%20Leonard%20Response%20to%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[13] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-01-14-Lifestyle%20Lift%20v.%20Leaonard%20Reply%20Brief.pdf
[14] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-05-02-Lifestyle%20Lift%20v.%20Leonard%20Judgment.pdf
[15] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-05-02-Lifestyle%20Lift%20v.%20Leonard%20Order%20on%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[16] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-05-07-Public%20Citizen%27s%20Letter%20Requesting%20Fees.pdf
[17] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-05-02-Transcript%20of%20Judge%27s%20Ruling%20on%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf