The Clerk defaults to the Moe’s Tavern pop-up window

A default has been filed in federal court against the defendants who ran the allegedly infringing “pop-up” versions of “The Simpson’s” bar Moe’s Tavern at various locations, including Delco’s Springfield.

A deputy clerk for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered a default judgment against Joseph McCullough, JMC Pop Ups LLC, and media-based Samantha Shutter at the request of an attorney for Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. was defending a lawsuit filed in July.

Ballard Spahr attorney Hara Jacobs did not immediately return a call for comment Thursday, but noted in a motion to dismiss Monday that Fox filed its complaint on July 11 and all three defendants were notify accordingly starting July 31.

“Defendants have failed to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint or to serve a copy of any answer or other response to plaintiff’s attorney of record,” the filing said.

Since none of the plaintiffs are infants, incompetent or active in the military, Jacobs said the default is appropriate.

Initial attempts to reach McCullough and Shutter for comment were unsuccessful, and a question posed in a chat on the JMC Pop Ups website went unanswered Thursday.

The Moe’s Tavern website that previously sold tickets for the events appeared to have been shut down as of Thursday. The site had proclaimed that the pop-up was a “fan-made parody event” not associated with “The Simpsons,” 20th Century Fox, Fox or Disney.

Jacobs indicated in the July complaint that Fox tried to resolve the matter without litigation for months before filing the suit, to no avail.

“The plaintiff has repeatedly demanded that the defendants cease their unauthorized use of the plaintiff’s intellectual property, and the defendants have falsely promised to do so,” the lawsuit states. “Instead, Defendants have merely feigned a willingness to cooperate while continuing and expanding their infringing business operations.”

Fox asserted claims for copyright and trademark infringement, unfair competition, and cybersquatting for use of related site names. It pointed to numerous copyrighted materials, including images, characters, ideas and decorations associated with The Simpsons at pop-up events in various states, and alleged that the defendants were profiting from unauthorized ticket and merchandise sales.

The lawsuit noted that entry prices ranged from $39 to $89, plus tax, and that the most expensive of these was called the Full Homer, which included a bag of various unlicensed merchandise.

Patrons were also able to purchase themed and beverage specials featuring characters and shows, as well as apparel, bags, hats, pins, keychains, insulated beer can coolers and related trademarked memorabilia, according to the complaint.

“In providing such infringing services and goods, Defendants wholesale trade Plaintiff’s properties to connect Defendants’ unauthorized and unapproved services and goods with Plaintiff’s authorized counterparts,” the complaint states.

Fox claimed it served the defendants a “cease and desist” notice in February, but said there have been 18 more Moe’s Pop Up events at at least two locations since then, with 11 more locations advertised by the rest of 2024.

Beginning in May, Fox said it learned the defendants further expanded their scope of operations to include copycat or trading events at another of its properties, Bob’s Burgers.

The suit seeks an order requiring the defendants to immediately cease all operations and advertising associated with any Fox properties and to turn over for destruction any allegedly infringing dressings, decorations and other materials.

In addition, Fox asked the plaintiffs to stop using any domain names associated with its properties and sought an award of legal costs and three times the defendants’ profits from the events, along with statutory damages.

The introduction of the default means that Fox can now seek an entry for a default judgment on its claims within 30 days. The court can still set aside the bond for good cause, but it was unclear Thursday what action, if any, the defendants plan to take on the lawsuit.