From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Btm, LLC v. Thomas

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Southern Division
Sep 4, 2015
SACV14-00414JVS(RNBx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2015)

Opinion

          PETER F. MUSIELSKI, Law Offices of, Irvine, California, Attorney for Defendants, Counterclaimants, William P. Thomas III, Frank Thomas, Carolyn Thomas Walters.


          AMENDED JUDGMENT

          JAMES V. SELNA, District Judge.

         This civil case was called for Trial before the Court, without a jury, on August 18, 2015. The Court heard closing arguments and the case was submitted to the Court for a decision on August 20, 2015. The Court having heard all the testimony and considered all admissible evidence, as well as arguments of counsel and their respective proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, entered its decision, in the record for its findings of fact and conclusions of law, on August 20, 2015.

         After reviewing all of the evidence in this matter and findings of fact and conclusions of law having been rendered, and having considered the Objections of BTM, LLC (Docket No. 140),

         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that judgment be entered in favor of Defendants, William P. Thomas III, Frank Thomas, and Carolyn Thomas Walters, and against the Plaintiff, BTM, LLC an Arizona Limited Liability Company. Plaintiff, is to take nothing by way of it's First Amended Complaint.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, on the Counter Claim, brought by Counter Claimants, William P. Thomas III, Frank Thomas, and Carolyn Thomas Walters, and against the Plaintiff, BTM, LLC that the Counterclaimants are entitled to a Declaration that the Authorization Agreement dated December 28, 2001 between William P. Thomas II and BTM, LLC terminated upon William P. Thomas II's death by operation of law, on October 10, 2009. Defendants are not subject to any Specific Performance obligation to Plaintiff, and that the Authorization Agreement having terminated is not binding on the Defendants. The Authorization Agreement is no longer in force, and whatever intellectual property rights granted to Plaintiff in the Authorization Agreement have lapsed, and that there is no right on the part of BTM, LLC to use any intellectual property rights, whatever their scope may be under the Authorization Agreement. This Declaration relates solely to rights granted under the Authorization Agreement and shall have no effect on any separate claim to ownership of intellectual property rights, including without limitation trademark and copyright rights. The Declaration that the Authorization Agreement terminated is correct.

         The Defendants, William P. Thomas III, Frank Thomas, and Carolyn Thomas Walters, are the prevailing parties in this action and are entitled to recover cost.


Summaries of

Btm, LLC v. Thomas

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Southern Division
Sep 4, 2015
SACV14-00414JVS(RNBx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2015)
Case details for

Btm, LLC v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:BTM, LLC, an Arizona Limited Liability Company Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM P…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Southern Division

Date published: Sep 4, 2015

Citations

SACV14-00414JVS(RNBx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2015)