The Trustees Of Columbia University in the City of New York v. Encyclopaedia…
The Trustees Of Columbia University in the City of New York v. Encyclopaedia Iranica Foundation
- Analisa Torres
- 1:19-cv-07465
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Trustees v. Encyclopaedia Iranica, Judge Torres granted EIF’s temporary restraining order barring publication of a specified fascicle pending a preliminary-injunction hearing.
Encyclopaedia Iranica Foundation, Inc. obtained a temporary restriction affecting The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, Elton Daniel, and Brill USA, Inc. The defendants were barred from publishing fascicle 6 of Volume XVI of the Encyclopaedia Iranica, or any similar fascicle or volume, pending the preliminary-injunction decision.
What happened
In The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York v. Encyclopaedia Iranica Foundation, Encyclopaedia Iranica Foundation, Inc. asked the court to stop Columbia, Elton Daniel, and Brill USA from using EIF’s name, domain name, and registered marks while the litigation continued.
The court found sufficiently serious questions for litigation, likely irreparable injury, inadequate monetary remedies, and favorable hardship and public-interest considerations. It granted the temporary restraining order to the extent that the defendants were barred from publishing fascicle 6 of Volume XVI of the Encyclopaedia Iranica, or any similar fascicle or volume, while the motion for a preliminary injunction was pending.
Judge Analisa Torres also scheduled a preliminary-injunction hearing for August 14, 2020, and set deadlines and procedures for witnesses, exhibits, evidence, and remote participation.
The detailed version
- The Trustees Of Columbia University in the City of New York v. Encyclopaedia… · No. 1:19-cv-07465
- Analisa Torres
- July 31, 2020
Background
Encyclopaedia Iranica Foundation, Inc. (EIF) applied for a temporary restraining order, an emergency order intended to preserve the situation while the court considers longer-term relief. EIF sought to stop The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, Elton Daniel, and Brill USA, Inc. from using what EIF described as counterfeit imitations of its trade name, domain name, and registered ENCYCLOPAEDIA IRANICA marks in advertising and selling printed and online publications during the litigation.
The opinion concerns two related cases: No. 19 Civ. 7465 and No. 19 Civ. 8562. The application was filed on July 24, 2020, and the court held a hearing on July 31, 2020.
Legal Standard
The court stated that the standards for a temporary restraining order are the same as those for a preliminary injunction. For an injunction involving alleged copyright or trademark infringement, the applicant must show either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions that are fair grounds for litigation. The applicant must also show likely irreparable injury without an injunction, inadequate legal remedies such as monetary damages, a balance of hardships favoring the applicant, and that the public interest would not be harmed by an injunction.
Ruling
The court found that EIF had shown a sufficiently serious question for litigation, likely irreparable injury, inadequate monetary remedies, a favorable balance of hardships, and a public interest that would not be disserved by the order.
Accordingly, the court granted the temporary restraining order to the extent that the defendants were enjoined from publishing fascicle 6 of Volume XVI of the Encyclopaedia Iranica, which was set for publication on August 1, 2020, or any similar fascicle or volume, pending resolution of the motion for a preliminary injunction. The opinion did not finally decide the underlying infringement claims.
Further Proceedings
The court set a preliminary-injunction hearing for August 14, 2020, at 9:30 a.m., to proceed by Skype for Business. It directed the parties to identify witnesses, submit additional documentary evidence, file exhibit lists and pre-marked exhibits, state objections, and provide appearance information by specified deadlines. Each side was allotted a maximum of three hours to examine witnesses, while the order also stated that a lawyer’s examination time counted toward that party’s two-hour limit.
Effect of the Order
The order temporarily restricted publication of the specified fascicle and any similar fascicle or volume by the defendants while the preliminary-injunction motion was pending. It also established procedures for the upcoming hearing.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.