2§ 3002(a) of the ACPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d). Each party alsomoves to strike certain evidentiary materials submitted inconnection with the summary judgment motions.This court has jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C.§§ 1121 (Lanham Act), 1332 (diversity), and 1367 (supplementaljurisdiction). After hearing oral argument, and for theforegoing reasons, the court grants eNom’s motion for summaryjudgment and denies the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.
I.Applicable legal standard
Summary judgment is appropriate where the “pleadings, thediscovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavitsshow that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact andthat the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). In making this determination, the “courtmust scrutinize the record in the light most flattering to theparty opposing the motion, indulging all reasonable inferences inthat party’s favor.” Mulvihill v. Top-Flite Golf Co., 335 F.3d15, 19 (1st Cir. 2003). On cross-motions for summary judgment,“the court must consider each motion separately, drawinginferences against each movant in turn.” Merchants Ins. Co. ofN.H., Inc. v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 143 F.3d 5, 7 (1st Cir.