be2 LLC v. Ivanov
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
642 F.3d 555 (2011)
- Written by Brianna Pine, JD
Facts
be2 LLC, a Delaware company owned by German-based be2 Holding A.G. (collectively, be2) (plaintiffs) operated be2.com, an international online dating website. Nikolay Ivanov (defendant), a New Jersey resident, allegedly ran a competing matchmaking service through be2.net. be2 sued Ivanov in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois for trademark infringement, claiming that Ivanov deliberately used a confusingly similar domain name and design to mislead customers. Ivanov did not respond or appear, and the district court entered a default judgment. To establish damages, be2 submitted documents showing, among other things, that 20 individuals with Illinois addresses had registered free accounts on be2.net. Other evidence included Ivanov’s LinkedIn profile identifying him as cofounder and CEO of be2.net and a webpage identifying Ivanov as responsible for censorship, profile approval, design, and advertising. After the district court entered its final default judgment, Ivanov moved to vacate, arguing the court lacked personal jurisdiction. In an affidavit, Ivanov denied that he was the founder or CEO of be2.net, claiming instead that he was an unpaid volunteer for Sladur, a Bulgarian company that owned the domain name, and that his role was limited to translation and customer service. He also emphasized that he had never been to Illinois. The district court rejected Ivanov’s testimony, found that his Illinois contacts were sufficient to establish jurisdiction, and denied his motion. Ivanov appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hamilton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.




