USA Containers v. Smith
| Utah District Court | |
| Judge: | Howard C Nielson, Jr |
| Case #: | 2:25-cv-00343 |
| Nature of Suit | 890 Other Statutes - Other Statutory Actions |
| Cause | 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act) |
| Case Filed: | May 02, 2025 |
| Last checked: Wednesday Oct 29, 2025 1:44 AM MDT |
|
Defendant
William J Smith, III
|
|
|
Plaintiff
USA Containers
|
Represented By
|
| Docket last updated: 06/12/2026 11:59 PM MDT |
| Thursday, March 05, 2026 | ||
| 23 | 23
order
Order
Thu 03/05 12:02 PM
DOCKET TEXT ORDER. 21 Docket Text Order did not terminate proceedings in this action or hold that Defendant is entitled to judgment. To the contrary, this case remains pending and nothing in the court's order bars Plaintiff from attempting to cure the deficiencies that led the court to deny 17 Motion for Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction. 22 Request for Entry of Judgment is accordingly DENIED. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr., on 3/5/2026. (jad) |
|
| Monday, February 09, 2026 | ||
| 22 | 22
misc
Request
Mon 02/09 11:31 AM
REQUEST for Entry of Judgment re 21 Order on Motion for Default Judgment,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Order on Motion for Permanent Injunction,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, filed by Plaintiff USA Containers.(Hathaway, Benson) |
|
|
Att: 1
Exhibit A - proposed Judgment Denying All Relief
|
||
| Tuesday, December 23, 2025 | ||
| 21 | 21
order
Order on Motion for Default Judgment Order on Motion for Permanent Injunction
Tue 12/23 3:13 PM
DOCKET TEXT ORDER: The court has carefully considered Plaintiff's 17 Motion for Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction. The court denies the motion. "To succeed on the merits of a false advertising claim under the Lanham Act, a plaintiff must show," among other things, "that the defendant made a false or misleading description of fact or representation of fact in a commercial advertisement about its own or another's product." Vitamins Online, Inc. v. Heartwise, Inc., 71 F.4th 1222, 1233 (10th Cir. 2023) (cleaned up) (emphasis added); see also 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B) . "To constitute commercial advertising or promotion," a statement "must be," among other things, "disseminated sufficiently to the relevant purchasing public to constitute 'advertising' or 'promotion' within that industry." Strauss v. Angie's List, Inc., 951 F.3d 1263, 1267 (10th Cir. 2020) (cleaned up). "While the Tenth Circuit has not established a strict statistical threshold," it is clear that to show this requirement is met a plaintiff must offer at least "some statistical analysis of the number of alleged incidents in comparison to the relevant market." Vivint, Inc. v. NorthStar Alarm Servs., LLC, 2019 WL 1098986, at *9 (D. Utah Mar. 8, 2019) (citing Sports Unlimited, Inc. v. Lankford Enters., Inc., 275 F.3d 996, 1004–05 (10th Cir. 2002)). Indeed, in this district, summary judgment has been granted in favor of defendants when the plaintiff fails to provide such evidence. See id., 2019 WL 1098986, at *9; John Bean Techs. Corp. v. B GSE Grp., LLC, 480 F. Supp. 3d 1274, 1313 (D. Utah 2020). Here, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that Defendant's statements were made "in commercial advertising or promotion" because Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Defendant's statements were "disseminated sufficiently to the relevant purchasing public to constitute 'advertising' or 'promotion' within that industry." Plaintiff has offered no evidence regarding "the number of alleged incidents in comparison to the relevant market." Indeed, Plaintiff's brief does not address this issue at all, alleging in its complaint only that "[Mr.] Smiths YouTube channel is publicly accessible and as of the filing of this Complaint had 289 regular subscribers." Dkt. No. 2 ¶ 14. The court accordingly cannot conclude that Plaintiff states a viable claim under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B). Absent a viable federal claim, the court will not adjudicate Plaintiff's state-law claims, let alone enter judgment based on those claims. After all, "[t]he Tenth Circuit has explained that when all federal claims have been dismissed, the court may, and usually should, decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any remaining state claims," Reyes v. N.A.R. Inc., 546 F. Supp. 3d 1031, 1042 (D. Utah 2021) (cleaned up), and it has applied the same principle in the context of summary judgment, see Ball v. Renner, 54 F.3d 664 (10th Cir. 1995). Although these cases do not squarely control the specific context here, the court finds them highly instructive. To be sure, Plaintiff purports to invoke this court's diversity jurisdiction over its state law claims. But it fails adequately to allege the citizenship of either party. As for itself, Plaintiff alleges that it "is a registered limited liability company in the state of Utah with its principal office or place of business located at 1361 N. Old Lincoln Highway, Grantsville, UT 84029." Dkt. No. 2 ¶ 1. But these facts are not relevant to Plaintiff's citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Rather, for these purposes it is well settled than an LLC's citizenship is determined by "the citizenship of all its members," which means that an LLC is a citizen of every State or foreign nation of which any of its members is a citizen. Siloam Springs Hotel, L.L.C. v. Century Sur. Co., 781 F.3d 1233, 1237–38 (10th Cir. 2015). Plaintiff must therefore identify all of its members and allege each member's citizenship. See Choice Hospice, Inc. v. Axxess Tech. Sols., Inc., 125 F.4th 1000, 1009 (10th Cir. 2025). And if any of these members is itself an LLC or other unincorporated entity, then Plaintiff must also identify all members of that constituent entity and allege the citizenship of each of those members, "tracing through however many layers necessary to reach either a corporation or a natural person." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). To be sure, Plaintiff also alleges that "[n]one of the members of USA Containers resides or has a principal place of business in Idaho." Dkt. No. 2 ¶ 2. But it is well settled that, for individuals who are United States citizens, diversity jurisdiction turns on state citizenship, not residence; that state citizenship turns on domicile; and that domicile is not the same thing as residence. See, e.g., Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30, 48 (1989); Siloam Springs Hotel, L.L.C. v. Century Sur. Co., 781 F.3d 1233, 1238 (10th Cir. 2015); Smith v. Cummings, 445 F.3d 1254, 1259–60 (10th Cir. 2006); Whitelock v. Leatherman, 460 F.2d 507, 514 (10th Cir. 1972). (For a non-U.S. citizen, the court instead looks to the actual country of citizenship.) And to the extent any of Plaintiff's members is an LLC or other unincorporated entity, these allegations are simply irrelevant. As for Defendant, Plaintiff alleges, "[u]pon information and belief," that he "is an individual residing in Canyon County, Idaho, at 7618 East Willard Drive, Nampa, Idaho 83687, and who conducts business under the Idaho-registered assumed business name of 'Patriot Containers.'" Dkt. No. 2 ¶ 3. But, again for individuals who are United States citizens, diversity jurisdiction turns on citizenship and domicile, not residence. For all these reasons, the court denies Plaintiffs 17 Motion for Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr., on 12/23/2025. No attached document. (jad) |
|
| Friday, June 20, 2025 | ||
| 20 | 20
order
Civil Standing Order
Fri 06/20 4:13 PM
CIVIL STANDING ORDER. Signed by Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr., on 5/12/2025. (mlp) |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2025 | ||
| 19 | 19
misc
Exhibits
Wed 06/18 9:46 AM
EXHIBIT C to17 Plaintiff's MOTION for Default Judgment as to defendant William J. Smith, III, MOTION for Permanent Injunction filed by USA Containers, consisting of four MP4 files on a single USB flash drive. The files are not uploaded to the docket due to non-PDF file type and the drive will be retained in a case file folder in the Clerk's Office while the case is active, and according to the retention schedule set forth by the Judicial Conference thereafter. (alt) |
|
| Monday, June 16, 2025 | ||
| 18 | 18
notice
Notice of Nonelectronic Filing
Mon 06/16 4:26 PM
NOTICE OF NONELECTRONIC FILING of Motion for Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction filed by Plaintiff USA Containers (Hathaway, Benson) |
|
| 17 | 17
motion
Default Judgment
Mon 06/16 4:21 PM
Plaintiff's MOTION for Default Judgment as to defendant(s) WILLIAM J. SMITH, III and Memorandum in Support filed by Plaintiff USA Containers.(Hathaway, Benson) |
|
|
Att: 1
Exhibit A - Declaration of Kristina Whipkey,
|
||
|
Att: 2
Exhibit B - Default Certificate,
|
||
|
Att: 3
Exhibit C - Videos,
|
||
|
Att: 4
Exhibit D - Declaration of Andrei Popa,
|
||
|
Att: 5
Exhibit E -Declaration of Benson L. Hathaway, Jr.,
|
||
|
Att: 6
Exhibit F - Proposed Default Judgment
|
||
| Thursday, June 05, 2025 | ||
| 16 | 16
order
Order on Motion for TRO Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Thu 06/05 9:20 AM
DOCKET TEXT ORDER. In 7 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, USA Containers requests preliminary injunctive relief (1) enjoining Defendant William J. Smith, III "from publishing, posting, re-publishing, repeating, directing others to publish or repeat, or otherwise disseminating false and defamatory statements concerning USA Containers and the purchase of fake reviews, status as an American company, sale of defective and or misrepresented products, or misleading and or fraudulent business practices," and (2) "requiring [Mr.] Smith to remove existing defamatory statements from YouTube and other online platforms." Dkt. No. 7 at 17. But courts ordinarily will enjoin defamation "only after a final adjudication on the merits that the speech is unprotected." Auburn Police Union v. Carpenter, 8 F.3d 886, 903 (1st Cir. 1993). That is because the "special vice of a prior restraint is that communication will be suppressed . . . before an adequate determination that it is unprotected by the First Amendment." Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Comm'n on Hum. Rels., 413 U.S. 376, 390 (1973). And to the extent that USA Containers bases its request on alleged Lanham Act violations, not on defamation, the same concerns identified in Pittsburgh Press weigh heavily against granting interim relief before a final determination that Mr. Smith's speech is unprotected, as does "the public's interest in a free marketplace of ideas," Crumbl LLC v. Dirty Dough LLC, 2023 WL 5180370, at *10 (D. Utah Aug. 11, 2023). Mr. Smith's evident decision to remove from his YouTube channel all videos on which USA Containers bases its request, see Dkt. No. 7-2, also appears to reduce the risk of injury Plaintiff seeks to avert. The court further notes that the Clerk of Court has entered a certificate of Mr. Smith's default. See Dkt. No. 15. Although a final adjudication on the merits generally occurs on summary judgment or at trial, a default judgment "is simply a final disposition of the case . . . that has the same effect as a judgment rendered after a trial on the merits." Su v. Ascent Constr., Inc. , 104 F.4th 1240, 1246 (10th Cir. 2024) (cleaned up). And on a motion for default judgment, the court treats the well-pleaded factual allegations in the complaint as if they had been adjudicated and found to be true. C.f. Olcott v. Delaware Flood Co. , 327 F.3d 1115, 1125 (10th Cir. 2003). For all of these reasons, the court concludes that, in the circumstances now presented in this action, USA Containers' request for injunctive relief would be more appropriately considered in connection with a motion for default judgment than with a request for interim relief. The court accordingly DENIES 7 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr., on 06/05/2025. No attached document. (edu) |
|
| Friday, May 30, 2025 | ||
| 15 | 15
order
Clerks Entry of Default Certificate ~Util - Terminate Motions
Fri 05/30 3:26 PM
Clerk's ENTRY OF DEFAULT CERTIFICATE as to William J Smith, III. A copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing and document mailed to William J. Smith, III, 7618 EAST WILLARD DRIVE NAMPA, IDAHO 83687. Motions terminated:14 Plaintiff's MOTION for Default Judgment as to defendant(s) WILLIAM J. SMITH, III and Memorandum in Support filed by USA Containers. (mh) |
|
| Thursday, May 29, 2025 | ||
| 14 | 14
motion
Default Judgment
Thu 05/29 11:38 AM
Plaintiff's MOTION for Default Judgment as to defendant(s) WILLIAM J. SMITH, III and Memorandum in Support filed by Plaintiff USA Containers.(Hathaway, Benson) |
|
|
Att: 1
Exhibit A - Declaration of Counsel in Support of Motion for Entry of Default Certificate,
|
||
|
Att: 2
Exhibit B - Proposed Certificate of Default
|
||
| Friday, May 16, 2025 | ||
| 13 | 13
misc
Request to Submit for Decision
Fri 05/16 5:00 PM
REQUEST to Submit for Decision re7 Ex Parte (Not Sealed) MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff USA Containers. (Nielsen, Alyssa) |
|
| Monday, May 12, 2025 | ||
| 12 | 12
service
Summons Returned Executed
Mon 05/12 1:03 PM
SUMMONS Returned Executed. Filed by USA Containers. Summons as to William J Smith, III. (Hathaway, Benson) |
|
| 11 | 11
service
Summons Returned Executed
Mon 05/12 1:01 PM
SUMMONS Returned Executed. Filed by USA Containers. Summons as to William J Smith, III. (Hathaway, Benson) |
|
| Tuesday, May 06, 2025 | ||
| 10 | 10
order
Order
Tue 05/06 7:06 PM
DOCKET TEXT ORDER. Having carefully reviewed 7 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, the court finds that Plaintiff has failed to justify an ex parte temporary restraining order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1). As the Supreme Court has explained, the issuance of ex parte temporary restraining orders is subject to "stringent restrictions" because "our entire jurisprudence runs counter to the notion of court action taken before reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard has been granted both sides of a dispute." Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Teamsters, 415 U.S. 423, 438?39 (1974). To the extent Plaintiff seeks an ex parte temporary restraining order, its motion is accordingly DENIED. (Its motion otherwise remains pending.) Plaintiff shall promptly serve Defendant with summons and a copy of 2 Complaint, a copy of 7 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and the supporting declaration and exhibits (including a viewable copy of Exhibit B), as well as a copy of this docket text order. Once Plaintiff has served these documents on Defendant, it shall promptly file proof of service. Defendant shall file a response to 7 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction no later than seven days after receipt of service. Plaintiff may file a reply no later than three days after Defendant files its response. If any of these deadlines falls on a weekend or a federal holiday, the response or reply may be filed by the end of the next business day. SO ORDERED. No attached document. Signed by Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr., on 5/6/2025. (edu) |
|
| 8 | 8
1
pgs
order
Order of Recusal
Tue 05/06 11:23 AM
ORDER OF RECUSAL Judge Jill N. Parrish recused. Case reassigned to Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr for all further proceedings. Case number will now read 2:25-cv-00343-HCN. Please make changes to document captions accordingly. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 5/6/2025. (jwt) |
|
| 7 | 7
motion
Temporary Restraining Order Preliminary Injunction
Tue 05/06 11:13 AM
Ex Parte (Not Sealed) MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and Memorandum in Support filed by Plaintiff USA Containers.(Hathaway, Benson). Added MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and corrected entry text on 5/6/2025 (alt) |
|
|
Att: 1
Exhibit A- Certificate of Assumed Business Name,
|
||
|
Att: 2
Exhibit B- Videos submitted to the Court via a Nonelectronic Filing, ECF 4,
|
||
|
Att: 3
Exhibit C- Declaration of Benson L. Hathaway, Jr. in Support of TRO and Preliminary Injunction
|
||
|
misc
Modification of Docket
Tue 05/06 12:23 PM
Modification of Docket re7 Ex Parte (Not Sealed) MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. Error: Motion requesting 2 possible reliefs was filed with only one relief selected. Correction: Second relief, "Preliminary Injunction", has been added and entry text corrected. (alt) |
||
| Monday, May 05, 2025 | ||
| 9 | 9
misc
Exhibits
Tue 05/06 12:39 PM
EXHIBIT B to2 Complaint and7 Ex Parte (Not Sealed) MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, filed by USA Containers, consisting of ten MP4 files on a single USB flash drive. The files are not uploaded to the docket due to non-PDF file type and the drive will be retained in a case file folder in the Clerk's Office while the case is active, and according to the retention schedule set forth by the Judicial Conference thereafter. (alt) |
|
| 6 | 6
notice
Notice of Deficiency
Mon 05/05 10:49 AM
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY The Motion for Temporary Restraining Order has not been filed. Counsel has until the end of the business day to file the motion or docket text will be stricken. (kec) |
|
| 5 | 5
service
Summons Issued Electronically
Mon 05/05 8:15 AM
Summons Issued Electronically as to William J Smith, III. Instructions to Counsel: 1. Click on the document number. 2. If you are prompted for an ECF login, enter your 'Attorney' login to CM/ECF. 3. Print the issued summons for service. (kec) |
|
| Friday, May 02, 2025 | ||
| 4 | 4
notice
Notice of Nonelectronic Filing
Fri 05/02 2:42 PM
NOTICE OF NONELECTRONIC FILING of Exhibit B to Complaint - digital storage device filed by Plaintiff USA Containers re2 Complaint, (Hathaway, Benson) |
|
| 3 | 3
misc
Report Regarding Patent and Trademark
Fri 05/02 2:23 PM
Report on the Filing of an action sent to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (sg) |
|
|
Att: 1
Exhibit Complaint
|
||
| 2 | 2
14
pgs
cmp
Complaint (Atty)
Fri 05/02 2:13 PM
COMPLAINT Verified (Motion for Temporary Restraining Order to be filed separately) against William J Smith, III (Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AUTDC-5415102) filed by USA Containers. (Hathaway, Benson) |
|
|
Att: 1
Civil Cover Sheet,
|
||
|
Att: 2
Exhibit A - Assumed Business Name,
|
||
|
Att: 3
Exhibit B - Notice of Nonelectronic Filing
|
||
| 1 | 1
misc
Remark - New Case
Fri 05/02 1:49 PM
Case has been indexed. Plaintiff USA Containers is directed to E-File the Complaint and cover sheet (found under Complaints and Other Initiating Documents) and pay the filing fee of $ 405.00 by the end of the business day. NOTE: The court will not have jurisdiction and a judge will not be assinged until the opening document is electronically filed and the filing fee paid in the CM/ECF system. Civil Summons may be issued electronically. Prepare the summons using the courts[LINK:PDF version] and email it to utdecf_clerk@utd.uscourts.gov for issuance. (sg) |
|
|
utility
Add and Terminate Judges
Fri 05/02 2:18 PM
Judge Jill N. Parrish added. Case number will now read 2:25-cv-00343-JNP. Please make changes to document captions accordingly. (sg) |
||