West's Jury Verdicts - Wisconsin Reports

Benefits to State Bar of Wisconsin Members	Case Highlights & Features	Publicize Your Case Results
As a service to its members, the State Bar of Wisconsin has entered into an alliance agreement with West, a Thomson Reuters business, to provide award information on Wisconsin civil jury trials, bench trials, settlements, and arbitrations. State Bar members can: Request a full case summary, free of charge Submit their own case results for online publication in Westlaw's® West's Jury Verdicts Wisconsin Reports, free of charge Order a paid online subscription to Westlaw's® West's Jury Verdicts - Wisconsin Reports Contact West: west.juryverdicts@thomsonreuters.com or 800-689-9378 For State Bar members submitting their own results for publication, West will: Send each submitter a pdf of his/her published case as it appears online in Westlaw's® West's Jury Verdicts - Wisconsin Reports, free of charge Consider highlighting and/or featuring the case in our semi-monthly "West's Jury Verdicts" article in InsideTrack, and on this web site.	*State Bar of Wisconsin's InsideTrack* Web Site Highlights - Our attorney editors select 6 cases to highlight in the State Bar of Wisconsin's semi-monthly "InsideTrack" web site in concise one-paragaph format from the many Wisconsin cases we publish each month in full summary format. This Web Site Case of the Month - Our attorney editors also select one case to feature in its entirety in its full summary format. dec Case of the Month April 2026** See below	Would you like West to consider featuring or highlighting your case? » Online Submission Form
		Westlaw Litigator
		Your key resource for every phase of litigation » Learn More
		Recommend Another State Bar
		Would you like West to provide similar content for another State Bar? » Contact Us

Case of the Month April 2026

Company asserted that corporation and its owner and/or operator infringed upon its trademark for a glass infuser smoking accessory by selling counterfeit products

G.S. Holistic LLC v. A-Z Tobacco Inc. et al.

Case Type:
Intellectual Property - Trademark/Trade Name
Unfair Competition & Business Practices - Other

Specific Liability:
Trademark Infringement

General Injury:
Monetary Damages

Jurisdiction:
State: Wisconsin
United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin.

Related Court Documents:
Plaintiff's complaint: 2023 WL 12144143
Defendants' joint and separate answer: 2023 WL 12144142
Verdict form: 2025 WL 2742783
Judgment 2025 WL 2742784

Case Name:
G.S. Holistic LLC v. A-Z Tobacco Inc. et al.

Docket/File Number:
1:23CV01056

Result Amount:
Plaintiff, $750,000

Result Date:
July 30, 2025

Judge:
Pamela Pepper

Attorneys:
Plaintiff: Ryan S. Fojo, The Ticktin Law Group, Deerfield Beach, FL; David L. Perry II, The Ticktin Law Group, Deerfield Beach, FL; Peter D. Ticktin, The Ticktin Law Group, Deerfield Beach, FL
Defendants: Jesse H. Kibort, Parker Daniels Kibort LLC, Minneapolis, MN; Steven R. Little, SRL Law PLLC, St. Paul, MN

Result Type:
Jury

Experts:
Plaintiff: Not Reported
Defendant: Not Reported

Breakdown of Award:
$100,000 to plaintiff for statutory damages
$650,000 to plaintiff for additional statutory damages for the defendants' willful use of the trademarks

Summary of Facts:
Plaintiff GS Holistic LLC was reportedly a Delaware limited liability company that operated and/or held trademarks for brands of vaporizers and/or smoking accessories, which included glass infusers with the trademark Stundenglass and/or a stylized S trademark. The plaintiff asserted that it was the owner of various United States trademarks, which included the registered trademarks Stundenglass and the stylized S logo, and that such trademarks appeared on its products' packaging and advertising.

The plaintiff contended that it spent substantial time, money and resources developing, advertising and promoting its products; as a result, consumers allegedly associated the Stundenglass trademarks with the plaintiff's high quality products. According to the plaintiff, due to the high quality of its brand and products, it collaborated with multiple celebrities and companies to sell Stundenglass products.

The plaintiff asserted that defendant A-Z Tobacco Inc., doing business as A-Z Smoke Shop (collectively referred to as AZ-Tobacco), located in Appleton, Wis., unlawfully sold glass infusers that had identical or nearly identical versions of the Stundenglass marks affixed to their products. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant's products were made of inferior materials and/or consisted of inferior technology; moreover, the plaintiff argued that the defendant intended to mislead consumers in order to sell its counterfeit products. The plaintiff claimed that A-Z Tobacco and its reported owner and/or operator, defendant Khaldon Sati, sold their counterfeit products while using the goodwill of the plaintiff's Stundenglass brand to obtain profits, thereby damaging Stundenglass's brand and causing the plaintiff to lose sales.

In its complaint, the plaintiff asserted multiple claims, which included claims for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition. The plaintiff argued that the defendants' alleged unauthorized use of counterfeit marks similar to the registered Stundenglass trademarks used to sell their glass infusers and accessories would likely cause confusion in the marketplace, resulting in diminished brand recognition of the Stundenglass trademarks, as well as lost profits and business for the plaintiff. The plaintiff also argued that the defendants' infringement was willful and in violation of the Lanham Act.

The plaintiff sought injunctive relief, as well as monetary damages against the defendants, which included disgorgement of profits, treble and statutory damages, together with costs and attorney fees.

According to the electronic court docket, the plaintiff's lawsuit, filed under case number 1:23-CV-01056, was subsequently consolidated with other associated cases, specifically with case numbers 2:23-CV-00742-PP and 1:23-CV-01054-PP, with case number 2:23-CV-00742-PP designated as the lead case for all future court filings.

According to the court's jury instructions, the defendants admitted that they had used counterfeit Stundenglass and stylized S marks that constituted trademark infringement. However, the defendants disputed that they had acted willfully and disputed the nature and extent of the plaintiff's claimed damages.

The matter proceeded to a jury trial. Jurors found that both A-Z Tobacco and Sati had willfully used the Stundenglass and/or stylized S trademarks.

Jurors awarded the plaintiff statutory damages of $100,000. The jury also awarded the plaintiff $650,000 for an additional amount of statutory damages for the defendants' willful use of the Stundenglass and/or stylized S trademarks.

In judgment, the court entered judgment in the plaintiff's favor against the defendants for $750,000 pursuant to the jury's findings.

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin.

Westlaw Citation:
2025 WL 3023312