UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`Investigation No. 337-TA-487
`
`CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL VEHICLES
`AND COMPONENTS THEREOF
`
`D N N
`
`COMPLAINANT’S COUNTERSTATEMENT OF FACTS =
`AS TO WHICH THERE ARE GENUINE ISSUES WARRANTING DENIAL OF
`
`RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY DETERMINATION -
`Complainant Deere & Company (“Deere”) hereby submits, pursuant to Ground Rule
`3(iv), the following Counterstatement of Facts As To Which There Are Genuine Issues
`Warranting Denial of Respondents’ Motion for Summary Determination, in connection with the
`Motion filed by Respondents Jiangling Tractor Co. Ltd. (“Jiangling”) and Dongfeng Agricultural
`Machinery Group (“Dongfeng”) (collectively, “Respondents”) seeking a summary determination
`dismissing Deere’s claim of dilution in this investigation:
`1. Complainant does not object to Paragraph 1.
`2. Complainant objets to Paragraph 2 as inaccurate and misleading. Respondents’
`Statement that the registered trademarks at issue in this investigation (U.S. Registration
`Nos. 1,502,103, 1,254,339, and 1,503,576) “involve the use of green and yellow colors”
`is inaccurate, and misleading because it implies the registrations are for the use of green
`and yellow in general. The trademark registration certificates define the scope and
`context of the trademarks, and are the best evidence of Deere’s exclusive trademark
`rights. Specifically, the ‘339 Registration describes a yellow stripe on a green machine
`
`hood or panel, and the ‘103 and ‘576 Registrations describe a green vehicle body or
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`frame with yellow wheels. Complaint Exs. 2-4 (Deere U.S. Trademark Registrations).
`
`3. Complainant objects to Paragraph 3 as inaccurate and misleading. Deere’s dilution
`claims against Respondents are not based solely “on the use of green and yellow colors
`on Respondents’ tractors,” but on the use of green and yellow colors on Respondents’
`tractors in a manner which blurs the distinctive quality of Deere’s green and yellow
`trademarks, weakens the ability of Deere’s green and yellow trademarks to identify
`Deere’s goods, and tarnishes Deere’s green and yellow trademarks. Complaint ] 161-
`163.
`
`4. Complainant objects to Paragraph 4 as inaccurate and misleading. Respondents’
`statement regarding the August 9, 2002 Order in Deere & Co. v. MTD Products, Inc., No.
`00 Civ. 5936 (S.D.N.Y.) omits the fact that the Order was based entirely on Second
`
`Circuit case law and was interlocutory in nature.
`
`Complainant submits the following Statement of Material Fact in opposition to
`
`Respondents’ Motion for Summary Determination:
`
`5. Complainant filed a motion in Deere & Co. v. MTD Products, Inc., No. 00 Civ. 5936
`(S.D.N.Y.) for leave to file an appeal of the Order dated August 9, 2002. The Motion
`was denied, and the Court refused to enter a final judgment on the dilution claim. As of
`today, the Order of August 9, 2002 is not final. Exhibit 1, Order of July 17, 2002, Deere
`
`& Co. v. MTD Prods., Inc., No 00 Civ. 5936.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEERE & COMPANY
`
`Date: August 14, 2003 w 5. A
`
`Robert S. Swecker, Esq.
`
`Bassam N. Ibrahim, Esq.
`
`S. Lloyd Smith, Esq.
`
`Bryce J. Maynard, Esq.
`
`BURNS, DOANE, SWECKER & MATHIS, LLP
`P.O. Box 1404
`
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1404
`Telephone: (703) 836-6620
`
`Attorneys for Complainant
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that true copies of the COMPLAINANT'S COUNTERSTATEMENT
`OF FACTS AS TO WHICH THERE ARE GENUINE ISSUES WARRANTING DENIAL OF
`RESPONDENTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY DETERMINATION was served on this 14th
`
`day of August, 2003 as follows:
`
`BY [;]A-ND DELIVERY:
`
`The Honorable Marilyn R. Abbott
`
`Secretary
`
`United States International Trade Commission
`
`500 E Street, S.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20436
`
`The Honorable Paul J. Luckern
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`United States International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W.
`
`Room 317
`
`Washington, D.C. 20436
`
`David O. Lloyd, Esq.
`
`Office of Unfair Import Investigations
`
`United States International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W.
`
`Room 401
`
`Washington, D.C. 20436
`
`(The original plus six copies)
`
`(Two copies)
`
`(One copy)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BY FEDERAL EXPRESS:
`
`Gary M. Hnath, Esq. (One copy)
`Venable, Baetjer, Howard & Civiletti, LLP
`
`1201 New York Avenue, N.W.
`
`Suite 1000
`
`Washington, D.C. 20005-3917
`
`(Counsel for Respondents Dongfeng Agricultural Machinery Group and Jiangling Tractor Co.)
`
`William A. Zeitler, Esq. (One copy)
`Thompson Coburn LLP
`
`1909 K Street, N.W.
`
`Suite 600
`
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`
`(Counsel for Respondents Co-Ag LLC, Fitzpatrick Farms, J & T Farms and Stanley Farm)
`
`David P. Miranda, Esq. (One copy)
`HESLIN ROTHENBERG FARLEY & MESITI P.C.
`
`5 Columbia Circle
`
`Albany, NY 12203-5160
`
`(Counsel for Respondents Erntetechnik Franz Becker, Sunova Implement Co.,
`Bourdeau Bros., Inc., and OK Enterprises)
`
`John D. Pellegrin, Esq. (One copy)
`Law Offices of John D. Pellegrin, P.C.
`
`9306 Old Keene Mill Road
`
`Burke, Virginia 22015
`
`(Counsel for Respondents Jiangsu Yueda Co. Ltd. and Agracat, Inc.)
`
`Robert A. Parsons, Esq. (One copy)
`Parsons & Goltry
`
`340 East Palm Lane
`
`Suite 260
`
`Phoenix, AZ 85004
`
`(Counsel for Respondent Workhorse Tractors)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BY FEDERAL EXPRESS: (Cont.)
`
`Claud Ingram (One copy)
`Attorney at Law
`
`4085 Sunset View
`
`Eugene, OR 97405
`
`(Counsel for Respondents China America Imports, Lenar Equipment, LLC and Task Master
`Equipment LLC)
`
`Davey-Joans Tractor & Chopper Supermarket (One copy)
`980 SR 13 Box 173
`Williamstown, NY 13493
`
`Pacific Avenue Equipment (One copy)
`1015 Pacific Avenue
`Yakima, WA 98901
`
`Sherrie Elhindi (One copy)
`SamTrac Tractor and Equipment
`
`3199 Plummers Lane, #13
`
`Chico, CA 95973
`
`Mr. Graham Slieker (One copy)
`Bolton Power Equipment
`
`39 Whitcomb Road
`
`Bolton, MA 01740
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS--INTERNATIONAL SERVICE:
`
`Paul Legaignoux (One copy)
`Agrideal
`
`Chemin des Perrines
`35500 Vitre
`France
`
`Diane C. Bridge
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`