
Beresford Booth Obtains Summary Judgment Dismissal in Slurry Pump Trade Dress Litigation
In a case with important ramifications for the law of trade dress, Primerus attorneys at Beresford Booth PLLC successfully defended claims of trade dress infringement, reverse passing off, unfair competition, and consumer protection violations, brought by the largest manufacturer of heavy duty slurry pumps in the United States.
Weir Slurry Group, Inc., is the United States' largest seller of slurry pumps, including its "Warman AH" line of slurry pumps, manufactured by a global, multi-million dollar company named Weir Minerals Australia, Ltd. The Warman AH pumps were designed in the 1960's, and have enjoyed a major market share worldwide.
Atlas Equipment Company retained Beresford Booth when they received a demand from Weir to cease and desist selling slurry pumps in the United States. Weir claimed, among other things, that the distinctive shape and appearance of their Warman AH slurry pumps were protected from copying by trade dress laws.
Taking the offensive, Atlas' attorneys Beresford Booth filed an action for declaratory judgment in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Weir retained Jones Day, one of the largest law firms in the world, to litigate Weir's claims, with Perkins Coie, the largest law firm in the Northwest, acting as local counsel. Weir asserted counterclaims in the declaratory judgment action for: (1) trade dress violation (in that Weir's pump designs comprised of protectable trade dress); (2) reverse palming off (in that Atlas allegedly sold Weir brand pumps as Atlas; (3) intentional interference with contract (a Chinese manufacturing agreement); (4) unfair competition; and (5) Consumer Protection Act Violations. Weir also asserted third-party claims against Atlas' Chinese manufacturer.
After two years of intense litigation, including 42 depositions around the United States, Australia and China, and a month before trial was set to begin, Beresford Booth obtained a dismissal of all of Weir's claims. In his oral ruling after a two-and-a-half hour summary judgment hearing on August 14, 2009, the Honorable Thomas Zilly reasoned that Weir had failed to raise a material issue of fact that the specific design elements at issue were "nonfunctional" as required to sustain a claim for trade dress infringement. Weir aggressively argued that the overall configuration of the specific design elements served a nonfunctional, source identifying purpose, so that the functionality of each design feature did not need to be nonfunctional. The Court rejected the argument, and ruled that since Weir had failed to come forward with sufficient evidence to support the nonfunctionality of the specific design elements, there was no genuine factual dispute about the overall combination of those elements being nonfunctional. Weir's other four claims were dismissed as well.