In 2014 Starbucks filed suit in California seeking to have a preliminary Injunction levied against Howard Heller, the owner of both Specialty Coffees International and Cafe Nu International, for (among other claims) trademark infringement. (Details of the case can be found: here) The defendant failed to answer the complaint and the judge granted the preliminary injunction to the plaintiff in November of 2014. In a world gone fully digitized, 'intellectual property' is growing harder to define and it is becoming more difficult to recognize (and then prove) if your intellectual property is being infringed on or stolen. The law offers a few ways to protect a company's brands and intellectual property. Certainly one of the most potent tools is the use of preliminary injunctive relief (yes, that is an actual term: proof), where a plaintiff can stop the misappropriation of physical or digital goods from being sold in the market place. In most cases, courts in California will insist that an Injunction Bond be procured before any per-judgement relief is levied.
An injunction bond protects the defendant from being wrongfully enjoined, and covers any damages the defendant may sustain should the court rule the plaintiff’s suit is wrongful. In the example used above, Starbucks was granted the preliminary injunction based on the merits of the claim. However, if the court eventually sides with the defendant, then Starbucks would be liable to pay for the harm the defendants suffered because their goods were prevented from being sold. Generally, judges in California do not issue injunctions unless the claim seems airtight and likely to be upheld. Or, in the language of the court, "Starbucks has demonstrated that it will likely suffer irreparable harm if an injunction is not issued". For all pre-judgement actions, the burden of proof is with the plaintiff and they must prove that they will suffer harm, rather than inflict it on the defendant through enjoinment.
INJUNCTION BONDS
Jurisco is the leader in injunction and all plaintiff court bonds. There are many agents and agencies in the marketplace who do not understand the product they are selling and rely on the insurance companies to underwrite their bonds. At Jurisco, they know the risks and how to effectively underwrite all court bonds
without the necessity of going back and forth with corporate "no" men underwriters. Most companies require collateral for ALL injunction bonds. While there are a few injunction cases that may need collateral, Jurisco strives to approve every bond without this requirement so the filing can move forward quickly and without
delay. For application, rates and more information on Injunction Bonds, contact the surety bond experts at Jurisco, and one of their knowledgeable staff will answer all your queries.