Glassybaby’s (left) and a defendant’s votive candle holders
Folks may remember that local candle holder designer Glassybaby, LLC, filed trade dress claims against competing designers in April (STL post here).
On June 6, Western District Judge Marsha Pechman dismissed those claims. In short, she found they weren’t adequately pleaded in plaintiff’s complaint.
The court wrote that “Defendants argue that the complaint fails to identify the mark or illustrate the so-called distinctive design. Plaintiff’s complaint states that the hand-blown glass containers are distinctive, but it does not describe the design in any detail. It is not possible to determine what the features of the votive candle holders are and whether they are functional or non-functional. This is not adequate to satisfy Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff must plead with at least some detail what the purported design is and how it is non-functional.”
The court similarly dismissed plaintiff’s dilution and Consumer Protection Act claims. However, it granted plaintiff leave to attempt to correct its pleading deficiencies in an amended complaint.
The case cite is Glassybaby, LLC v. Provide Gifts, Inc., No. 11-00380 (W.D. Wash. June 6, 2011) (Pechman, J.).