haris-mm-shutterstock-com-3m-masks
Haris MM / Shutterstock.com
5 May 2020AmericasSarah Morgan

3M ramps up US mask litigation, secures injunction

3M has filed four more trademark lawsuits against companies accused of reselling N95 masks at inflated prices amid the COVID-19 pandemic, while also securing a preliminary injunction in another suit.

In three complaints filed in Florida and one filed in Indiana, 3M is attempting to use US trademark law to fight alleged price-gouging of masks.

Each of the suits claim that the defendants are using misleading tactics to suggest they’re authorised vendors of 3M masks to government agencies.

In its case against King Law Center, Chartered, filed at the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida, 3M claimed that the Floridian company had attempted to sell five million 3M-brand masks at more than 460% of 3M’s list price to the Florida Department of Management Services’ State Emergency Operation Center (SEOC).

“Defendant claimed that 3M had implemented intricate procedural steps that required the SEOC to engage defendant as an escrow attorney and deposit SEOC funds into an escrow account if the SEOC wanted to buy 3M masks,” said the claim.

3M’s Indiana suit, filed against Nevada-based company Zenger and its owner Zachary Puznak, accused Puznak of attempting to sell between 100 million and five billion of 3M’s N95 masks to Indiana.

The suit added: “3M’s current annual global production of all 3M N95 respirators is 1.1 billion–3.9 billion fewer than the number of just one model that Puznak again offered to sell the State of Indiana.”

According to 3M, the defendants were then pressed on their affiliation with 3M and responded with “nobody [from 3M] has time or interest ... in satisfying ... paranoid irrationality”.

The two other suits contained similar allegations of price-gouging.

Securing an injunction

Last week, LSIPR reported that 3M had  convinced District Judge Loretta Preska of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York to grant a restraining order against a New Jersey company it accused of infringing the 3M trademarks.

In addition to a restraining order, Preska ordered the New Jersey-based Performance Supply to explain why a longer-term injunction shouldn’t be issued.

Yesterday, May 4, after a telephone hearing, Preska granted a temporary injunction.

“No amount of money could repair the damage to 3M’s brand and reputation if it is associated with the crime of price-gouging at the expense of healthcare workers and other first responders in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis,” said Preska.

The judge added that, as 3M and its manufacture of N95 masks had become household knowledge during the pandemic with government officials drawing extensive attention to 3M, there was no question that Performance Supply had adopted the trademarks with actual knowledge of 3M’s rights.

According to the court, Performance Supply was using the 3M marks to exploit their widespread fame and goodwill.

“Indeed, defendant’s primary line of business is selling vans and other vehicles, and it did not begin attempting to sell purported 3M-brand N95 respirators until after the COVID-19 global pandemic began,” said Preska.

Finally, the court concluded that 3M was likely to succeed on its claim of false advertising.

Preska added: “Sadly, in this case, defendant’s formal quote actually misled and deceived experienced buyers in the procurement office of one of the world’s largest cities into believing that defendant was an authorised ‘vendor’ of approximately $45 million-worth of 3M-brand N95 respirators.”

LSIPR also  covered another of 3M’s suits against a North Carolina company it called a “deplorable pandemic profiteer”.

Ivan Fong, 3M senior vice president, general counsel and secretary,  said: “We are grateful that in each of these cases, the false offers were reported to 3M, and the attempts to deceive public officials did not succeed.”

Fong added that 3M will continue to take legal action in cases like these and that the company is working “closely with national and international law enforcement to help stop the perpetrators of these unlawful and unethical schemes”.

Did you enjoy reading this story?  Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox.


More on this story

Americas
2 May 2023   Judge enters default judgment as New Jersey-based firm failed to respond to suit | Defendant allegedly sought to sell 3M-branded masks at inflated prices during the pandemic.
Americas
21 January 2021   3M has secured an injunction against a Florida company it has accused of selling more than 10,000 counterfeit versions of its N95 face masks at the US District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Medtech
17 August 2020   An Amazon seller has agreed to pay almost $200,000 to settle a trademark lawsuit brought by face mask manufacturer 3M over alleged price gouging.

More on this story

Americas
2 May 2023   Judge enters default judgment as New Jersey-based firm failed to respond to suit | Defendant allegedly sought to sell 3M-branded masks at inflated prices during the pandemic.
Americas
21 January 2021   3M has secured an injunction against a Florida company it has accused of selling more than 10,000 counterfeit versions of its N95 face masks at the US District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Medtech
17 August 2020   An Amazon seller has agreed to pay almost $200,000 to settle a trademark lawsuit brought by face mask manufacturer 3M over alleged price gouging.