Jefferson C. Glassie, Esq. and Megan C. Spratt, Esq.
Pillsbury Law Firm, Washington, DC
The Veterinary Hospital Managers Association (“VHMA”) won a major victory in court when the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee granted VHMA’s motion for summary judgment and ordered Marcus Dorris and the Pope Animal Clinic to immediately cease all uses of the CVPM certification mark (which stands for “Certified Veterinary Practice Manager”). The Court decision came down on August 9, 2010. See Veterinary Hospital Managers Association, Inc. v. Dorris, No. 2:08-cv-2647-JPM-tmp (W.D. Tenn. 2010). VHMA was represented by Patrick Jennings of Pillsbury and local counsel in Tennessee.
The Court specifically found that Dorris and the Pope Animal Clinic were not authorized to use the CVPM certification mark and ordered them to remove it from their signage, advertisements, and any other public displays. Christine Shupe, the Executive Director of VHMA, commented that the case demonstrates, “the serious consequences of using VHMA’s trademarks without authorization, or violating the terms of use of the marks, and that VHMA will legally pursue those who use its marks without permission or in an improper way.”
VHMA certification requires specific educational and experiential credentials, and applicants must pass an exam on the management of veterinary practices. Only those who meet the requirements and receive the certification may use the CVPM designation, which is registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Marcus Dorris and Pope Animal Clinic are not certified by VHMA, but were using the CVPM mark without VHMA’s permission. VHMA contacted Dorris demanding that he discontinue use of the mark, but he refused. VHMA, determined to protect its valuable mark, then filed the lawsuit, alleging trademark infringement by Dorris and Pope Animal Clinic. It is the obligation of a trademark owner to stop infringing uses of its marks by taking action in court, or risk losing rights in the marks.
The defendants admitted that the CVPM mark was used after Dorris’s name, on the Clinic’s sign, front door, and windows, and in the Clinic’s advertisements. The court found that the defendants’ use of the CVPM mark was likely to cause confusion among consumers regarding whether defendants were certified by VHMA. The court stated that the CVPM mark is distinctive and widely known, and found that the defendants had used the mark “to mislead consumers into thinking [they were] certified or endorsed by [VHMA].” Dorris and the Clinic even tried to use a similar mark, “CVPD,” but the court found this also was misleading and not lawful. Because the requirements for infringement were satisfied, the court granted summary judgment as to liability on all of VHMA’s claims and ordered immediate injunctive relief compelling Dorris and the Clinic to halt its infringing use of the CVPM designation.
VHMA is now taking steps to recover its attorneys’ fees. The case sends a strong signal to potential infringers that certification bodies will not tolerate misuse of their trademarks and can enforce their rights as trademark owners under the law.