A federal judge told Stone Brewing and Molson Coors to work out a post-trial injunction over the use of the word “stone” or end up on the wrong end of a court order that both companies may not like, according to Courthouse News Service.
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez has given the two companies 20 days to meet and hash out an injunction that would work for both companies. Benitez added that he was unsure “an injunction would end litigation between the parties.”
Since a jury awarded the San Diego craft brewery $56 million in its trademark infringement lawsuit against Molson Coors in late March, the two companies have been entangled in a voluminous pile of post-trial motions.
Friday’s hearing was slated to resolve Stone’s request for a permanent injunction to block Molson Coors from using Keystone Light cans and packaging that separated the words “Key” and “Stone,” while still allowing the company to reference the number of cans in multipacks as “Stone” or “Stones.”
Benitez reportedly had concerns over being asked to issue an injunction for the word “stone,” which he said is “very commonly used in the English language and has many different uses.”
Molson Coors’ attorney John Bunge argued that his client shouldn’t be forced to remove 30-packs of Keystone Light from store shelves at the outset of the summer selling season. He added that the company has done its “best to address the issues” by purging old marketing and advertising from social media, billboards, clothing and more.
Bunge added that if the judge plans to require Molson Coors to remove packages from shelves, then the company should be allowed a “period of transition to the new brand.” He also asked the judge to reverse the jury verdict, and another Molson Coors attorney asked the judge to toss Stone’s full case due to a lack of enforcement over its trademark from the time it sent a cease-and-desist letter in April 2010 before filing its lawsuit in February 2018.
Stone attorney Noah Hagey argued that the injunction was necessary and “the remedy of choice” in trademark infringement cases, according to the Ninth Circuit.
“If we don’t have an injunction, what that means is we’ve been under-awarded damages,” Hagey told the judge, arguing the damages calculated for future lost profits was based on receiving an immediate injunction, according to Courthouse News. “We believe there is substantially more injury that has not been compensated.”
Beyond the injunction, attorneys for Stone and Molson Coors are slated to meet in court again on August 8 for a hearing on Stone’s motion to disgorge $116 million in profits and award treble damages of $168 million from Molson Coors.