« A Typosquatter Tells All, and Defends His Actions | Main | Ninth Circuit Finds Use of Ordinary Word in Trademark Still Can Dilute »

Shingle Manufacturer Obtains Permanent Injunction, with Compliance Options

In CertainTeed Corp. v. Seattle Roof Brokers, a manufacturer of asphalt shingles filed suit against James Garcia, a “roof broker” who allegedly made false statements about CertainTeed’s roofing products.

On June 28, Western District Judge Richard Jones granted summary judgment for CertainTeed on its false advertising and Consumer Protection/Unfair Business Practices Act claims, and imposed a permanent injunction.

In doing so, the court found Mr. Garcia’s falsehoods included statements that CertainTeed’s product “will not be able to pass a resale inspection after 15 to 20 years”; that “one roofing contractor reports submitting over 600 warranty claims to CertainTeed within the last four years”; and CertainTeed’s product “have a history of premature failure.”

Gotta love a court that gives its parties options.

In its permanent injunction, the court stated: “As to Mr. Garcia’s website (whether at www.seattleroofbrokers.com or any other domain he controls), he has two options. He may, at the top of every page on his website, include a prominent hyperlink (of a font size at least as large as any other font used on the page) to an electronic version of this order. The text of the hyperlink shall include the following statement: ‘Please click here for court order finding that this website contains false statements.’ His website must continue to include these hyperlinks until he removes every false statement that violates this order, at which time he can notify the court that the false statements have been removed. If the court finds that the false statements have been removed, it will permit him to remove the hyperlinks. Alternatively, Mr. Garcia may take his website ‘offline,’ remove the false statements, submit the new website content to the court for approval, and await court approval before placing his website online.”

The case cite is CertainTeed Corp. v. Seattle Roof Brokers, No. 09-563 (W.D. Wash. June 28, 2010) (Jones, J.).

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (1)

The judge decided statements that CertainTeed Presidential shingles "have a history of premature failure" is false/misleading because I can not prove ALL or MOST shingles fail (within 15-20 years). This decision was made after CertainTeed admits they have been paying claims for premature failure of Presidential shingles between the ages of 15 and 20 years, and after CertainTeed admits they can not show one example - not even one - of Presidential shingles lasting beyond 20 years in the Seattle area. BTW this summary judgment was made based on a disputed material fact about CertainTeed's roofing "inspection" made from ground level only... so much for allowing a jury to decide material facts - most consumers I know expect a roof inspection to be made from the rooftop - so the shingles in question can be seen.
July 4, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJim Garcia

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.