The recent MARATAC, INC. lawsuit filed in the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 1:25-cv-20633) presents complex legal challenges for named defendants. This action alleges trademark infringement, counterfeiting, false designation of origin, and unfair competition under both the Lanham Act and Florida common law regarding the federally registered “ZULU” and “MARATAC” trademarks for watch bands and related accessories.
Heitner Legal’s Specialized Defense Experience
Heitner Legal has developed particular expertise in defending e-commerce sellers against trademark infringement allegations. Our firm has successfully represented numerous defendants in cases filed by SRIPLAW, the same firm representing MARATAC in this action. This experience provides us with valuable insights into SRIPLAW’s litigation strategies, settlement approaches, and case management techniques. We provide free consultations, so feel free to contact us.
Critical Defense Strategies
Jurisdictional Challenges
Our attorneys have effectively contested jurisdiction in similar cases against foreign e-commerce sellers. We have successfully argued that:
- The mere availability of products on marketplace platforms does not establish sufficient minimum contacts with Florida;
- Many defendants lack the “purposeful direction” toward Florida necessary for specific jurisdiction; and
- The constitutional due process requirements for exercising jurisdiction over foreign entities are not met.
In previous cases against SRIPLAW, Heitner Legal has secured dismissals on jurisdictional grounds, particularly for defendants with limited U.S. connections. We have also resolved matters in their infancy, reducing SRIPLAW’s initial demand by great amounts to establish a quick and easy settlement.
Contesting Joinder Appropriateness
Heitner Legal has extensive experience challenging the mass-joinder approach frequently employed in these cases. We have demonstrated that:
- Individual defendants often have entirely separate business operations;
- The alleged “common scheme” is often merely parallel conduct by unrelated sellers; and
- Severance is appropriate where defendants face prejudice from association with dissimilar parties.
Substantive Trademark Defenses
Drawing on our experience with the watch and accessories industry, Heitner Legal can develop robust defenses including:
- Trademark Validity and Scope Analysis
- Our team has previously researched the history and usage of “ZULU” in watch terminology;
- We have access to industry experts who can testify regarding common watch band terminology; and
- Our prior cases have established effective strategies for challenging the scope of trademark protection.
- Absence of Consumer Confusion
- Heitner Legal has successfully demonstrated lack of confusion in similar cases;
- We work with survey experts to evaluate actual marketplace conditions; and
- Our team has experience highlighting clear product differentiation in e-commerce contexts.
- Fair Use Considerations
- Our attorneys have successfully argued descriptive fair use in similar trademark cases;
- We have developed effective strategies for demonstrating good faith in product marketing; and
- Heitner Legal understands the nuances of fair use in the specialized watch accessories market.
Addressing Damages Claims
SRIPLAW typically seeks maximum statutory damages in these cases. Heitner Legal has successfully:
- Reduced potential damages by contesting willfulness allegations;
- Introduced evidence of limited sales volume to contextualize actual market impact; and
- Negotiated reasonable settlements that avoid business-destroying judgments.
Practical Considerations
Based on our experience facing SRIPLAW in similar litigation:
- Asset Protection: We immediately address potential account freezes to minimize business disruption.
- Brand Registry Impacts: We work directly with marketplace platforms to maintain selling privileges where possible.
- Timeline Pressure: Our team is prepared to respond quickly to temporary restraining order requests.
Free Consultation Opportunity
Heitner Legal offers a complimentary consultation for defendants named in the MARATAC litigation. During this consultation, we will:
- Review your specific circumstances and potential defenses;
- Explain the litigation process and likely timeline;
- Discuss potential strategies and approaches tailored to your situation; and
- Outline options for representation and next steps.
Conclusion
With specific experience defending against SRIPLAW’s trademark litigation approach, Heitner Legal is uniquely positioned to provide effective representation for defendants in the MARATAC case. Our firm’s understanding of e-commerce seller operations, specialized knowledge of trademark law, and track record in similar cases enables us to develop strategic defenses that protect our clients’ interests.