Reported / Citable
Background
Jerrel “Kiotti” Brown, also known as “Radio Boss,” alleges that he has used “ON THE RADAR” and “ON THA RADAR” in radio, podcasts, video programming, live entertainment, and related services since 2016. He obtained a federal registration for “ON THA RADAR” in 2023. On The Radar Productions, LLC, a New York entertainment-content company, claims that it began using “ON THE RADAR” in 2018 and later petitioned the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to cancel Brown’s registration.
Brown sued OTR for trademark infringement after OTR conducted a 2023 multi-city tour that included a four-day Houston stop. During that stop, OTR recorded content with 75 artists at a local business, used an “On the Radar” neon sign, solicited Houston artists through an email address bearing the name, and produced content labeled “On the Radar HOUSTON TEXAS EDITION.” OTR moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue under Rules 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(3).
The Court’s Holding
The court denied the motion. Although OTR was not subject to general jurisdiction in Texas, the court held that Brown made the required prima facie showing of specific jurisdiction. OTR purposefully entered Houston, engaged local artists and a local business, used the disputed mark there, and created a Houston-branded content series. Those contacts were not merely the result of making globally accessible internet content available in Texas.
The court further held that Brown’s infringement claim arose out of or related to OTR’s Texas contacts because the claim concerned OTR’s use of essentially the same mark in producing and distributing the Houston series. Exercising jurisdiction was fair and reasonable despite the burden of litigating outside OTR’s home state. Venue was also proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because the Houston portion of OTR’s tour formed at least part of the events giving rise to the claim.
Key Takeaways
- A defendant’s deliberate, in-state production activity can support specific jurisdiction even when its content is distributed through globally accessible websites.
- OTR’s Houston recordings, local outreach, signage, and Houston-specific branding sufficiently connected Texas to Brown’s trademark claim at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
- The court decided only the jurisdiction and venue questions; it did not resolve the merits of Brown’s trademark-infringement allegations.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates how physical production activity and forum-specific branding can distinguish an online-content dispute from cases involving only generally accessible internet publications. A media company that enters a state and uses a disputed mark to create locally branded content may reasonably face suit there.
The decision also underscores that venue does not require every relevant event to occur in the chosen district. A substantial local component of the alleged conduct may be enough when it forms part of the events giving rise to the claim.