Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Main Menu

Unleashed Doggie Day Care, LLC v. Petco Animal Supplies Store, Inc.

Court:
District of Massachusetts
Subject Matter:
Trademark
Procedural Posture:
Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Unleashed Doggie Day Care v. Petco Animal Supplies Store
    Unleashed Doggie Day Care v. Petco Animal Supplies Store
    Unleashed Doggie Day Care, LLC v. Petco Animal Supplies Stores, Inc., Case 10:CV:10742-DJC, Trademark Case, 12/01/2011, 11:00 AM (EDT). J. Joseph Moakley Courthouse, Boston, MA. Judge Denise J. Casper Presiding

    Unleashed Doggie Day Care, LLC v. Petco Animal Supplies Stores, Inc., Case 10:CV:10742-DJC, Trademark Case, 12/01/2011, 11...

Case Summary: 10-cv-10742

On April 30, 2010, plaintiff Unleashed Doggie Day Care, LLC filed a complaint for violation of the Lanham Act and related state law in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts against defendant Petco Animal Supplies Stores, Inc. arising out of the use of the term "Unleashed." The complaint alleged that plaintiff owns the trademark "Unleashed" for retail store services for animal and pet supplies and for dog-walking, pet-sitting, off-leash group exercises for dogs, and grooming. The complaint further alleged that defendant's stores, "Unleashed by Petco," cause consumer confusion and constitute unfair and deceptive trade practices.

On May 24, 2010, defendant filed an answer, denying liability. On October 21, 2011, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that "Unleashed" is not entitled to trademark protection and that "Unleashed by Petco" is not likely to cause consumer confusion. Plaintiff opposed the motion.

The court heard oral argument on the motion on December 1, 2011. On December 28, 2011, the court issued its memorandum and order granting Petco's motion for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiff had failed to present sufficient evidence that (1) its use of "Unleashed" was entitled to trademark protection; and (2) defendant's use of "Unleashed by Petco" was likely to cause consumer confusion.

Case Highlights

  • Complaint filed 4/30/2010 [Doc # 1]
  • Answer filed 5/24/2010 [Doc # 13]
  • Defendant files motion for summary judgment on 10/21/2011 [Doc ## 82-83]
  • Plaintiff files opposition to motion for summary judgment on 11/18/2011 [Doc # 95]
  • Defendant files reply on 11/28/2011 [Doc # 131]
  • Hearing on 12/1/2011
  • Memorandum and Order filed 12/28/2011: MSJ GRANTED. CASE CLOSED. [Doc # 132]

 

Case-related documents, including those referenced above, are available via the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) service. For more information, visit Pacer.gov.