Legal Opinion
Hornady Manufacturing Co. v. Doubletap Ammunition, Inc.
District Court, D. Utah
Decided December 15, 2011No. Case No. 2:11-CV-18 TSPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TED STEWART, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant DoubleTap Ammunition, Inc.’s (“Doubletap”) Motion for Summary Judgment. Also before the Court is Plaintiff Hornady Manufacturing’s (“Hornady”) Alternative Rule 56(d) Motion for Stay Pending Discovery.
I. BACKGROUND
Both Doubletap and Hornady sell high-end ammunition for various types of firearms. In 1997, Hornady began using the TAP trademark in connection with ammunition, and has registered its TAP marks with the Patent and Trademark Office.
In 2010, Hornady sent a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Dawn Donut Company, Inc. v. Hart's Food Stores, Inc. And Starhart Bakeries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
- Johnston v. Standard Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Sally Beauty Company v. Beautyco Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Soriano v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Soriano)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2018
- Jenco, LC, and Dean Gardner Investment, LC v. Valderra Development, LLC, et alDistrict Court, D. Utah · 2026