United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
Schott, Anita Marie Boor, QUARLES & BRADY, LLP,
Christopher A. Cole, David Ervin, CROWELL & MORING LLP,
Holly Melton, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Attorneys for
Plaintiff MillerCoors, LLC
PLAINTIFF MILLERCOORS, LLC'S CIRCUIT RULE 3(C)(1)
MillerCoors, LLC (“MillerCoors”) respectfully
submits this Docketing Statement pursuant to Circuit Rule
3(c)(1) of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh
District Court Jurisdiction
brought this lawsuit against Defendant Anheuser-Busch
Companies, LLC (“AB”) in the United States
District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin on March
21, 2019, alleging that AB's actions constitute false
advertising and trademark dilution under the Lanham Act, 15
U.S.C. § 1125(a) and 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c). (Dkt. 1).
The district court has subject matter jurisdiction over
MillerCoors Lanham Act claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
moved for a preliminary injunction on March 28, 2019. (Dkt.
8). On May 24, 2019, the district court entered an Opinion
and Order granting in part and denying in part MillerCoors
motion for preliminary injunction. (Dkt. 57). As part of that
Opinion and Order, the district court invited additional
briefing on the issue of whether the injunction should
encompass AB's packaging.
September 4, 2019, the district court entered a second
Opinion and Order enjoining AB from using previously enjoined
statements on its packaging. (Dkt. 102). On September 6,
2019, the district court modified its September 4 Opinion and
Order to require compliance by November 1, 2019. (Dkt. 115).
October 23, 2019, on limited remand pursuant to an interim
order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh
Circuit, the district court entered a separate Preliminary
Injunction Order encompassing the May 24 advertising
injunction and the September 4 packaging injunction, as
modified on September 6. (Dkt. 189).
Appellate Court Jurisdiction
October 23, 2019, contemporaneously with this Docketing
Statement, MillerCoors filed a Notice of Appeal from those
portions of the district court's October 23, 2019
Preliminary Injunction Order that denied in part MillerCoors
motion for a preliminary injunction for the reasons stated in
the district court's May 24 Opinion and Order.
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has
jurisdiction over MillerCoors appeal under 28 U.S.C. §
1292(a)(1). Under § 1292(a)(1), any order granting or
denying a preliminary injunction is an immediately appealable
interlocutory order. See Timberlake v. Oppenheimer &
Co., 729 F.2d 515, 518 (7th Cir. 1984) (“28 U.S.C.
§ 1292(a)(1) authorizes the immediate appeal of orders
granting or denying preliminary injunctions”); see
also Kiel v. City of Kenosha, 236 F.3d 814, 815 (7th
Cir. 2000) (reviewing denial of motion for injunction as an
immediate interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C. §
1292(a)(1)). MillerCoors anticipates proposing a briefing
schedule limited to issues not already briefed in the prior
appellate proceedings described in Section III.
not a direct appeal from a decision of a magistrate judge. No
Rule 59 motion or any other motion claiming to toll the time
within which to appeal has been filed.
Prior or Related Appeals
have been three prior appeals in this case.
on June 24, 2019, MillerCoors appealed from the district
court's May 24 Opinion and Order. That appeal was
docketed as No. 19-2200 and was expedited, ...