Go New York Tours, Inc. v. Tea on the Strip, LLC
2:25-cv-00279
D. Nev.Jun 4, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs operate "Tea Around Town," a business offering an upscale tea experience on luxury double-decker buses, with a distinctive pink, white, and gold trade dress, and have federally registered the “Tea Around Town” trademark.
- Defendants Yolanda and Dustin Drai, after patronizing Plaintiffs' business, established "Tea on the Strip" in Nevada, replicating a similar business model, name, and overall aesthetic with a pink-themed bus and similar branding.
- Plaintiffs alleged trademark and trade dress infringement, unfair competition, and deceptive trade practices, and sought emergency injunctive relief after Defendants' launch.
- Defendants made some changes during litigation, including changing their business name to "Café on the Strip" and altering aspects of their marketing, but retained certain features challenged by Plaintiffs.
- Plaintiffs presented evidence of customer confusion and claimed Defendants’ product was of inferior quality, risking damage to Plaintiffs' reputation and goodwill.
- The Court held a hearing, found evidence supporting Plaintiffs' claims, and issued a preliminary injunction while requiring Plaintiffs to post a $500,000 bond.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trademark Infringement | Defendants’ use of similar marks is likely to confuse consumers. | Changes to name and brand negate any ongoing infringement. | Likelihood of confusion found; for plaintiffs. |
| Trade Dress Infringement | Defendants’ bus design closely copies protectable trade dress. | Design is functional; pink is commonly used for marketing to women. | Trade dress is nonfunctional and distinctive. |
| Irreparable Harm | Ongoing confusion and inferior product damage reputation. | Operations ceased, changes made, so no irreparable harm occurs. | Harm presumed, not rebutted; for plaintiffs. |
| Bond Requirement | Security should align with costs; no high damages evidence from Drais. | Requested $1 million bond for potential damages and costs to rebrand. | $500,000 bond set per court's discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (preliminary injunction standard)
- AMF, Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (factors for likelihood of confusion)
- Entrepreneur Media, Inc. v. Smith, 279 F.3d 1135 (marks similarity and relatedness analysis)
- Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp., 174 F.3d 1036 (likelihood of confusion, prudent consumer standard)
- Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763 (trade dress protectability and distinctiveness)
- Fuddruckers, Inc. v. Doc's B.R. Others, Inc., 826 F.2d 837 (secondary meaning in trade dress)