Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 1 df 15 Page ID #:1
`
`1 DAVID H. BERNSTEIN (CA Bar No. 336551)
`DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP
`2 650 California Street
`San Francisco, CA 94108
`3 Tel:
`(415) 738-5700
`Fax:
`( 415) 644-5628
`4 Email: dhbernstein@debevoise.com
`
`5 JARED I. KAGAN (Pro Hae Vice Forthcoming)
`PARKER C. EUDY (Pro Hae Vice Forthcoming)
`6 DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP
`919 Third A venue
`7 New York, New York 10022
`Telephone: (212) 909-9000
`8 Facsimile: (212) 909-6836
`Email: j ikagan@debevoise.com
`9 Email: pceudy@debevoise.com
`
`10 Attorneys for Plaintiff
`SNAP INC.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14 SNAP INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`15
`
`16
`
`V.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`CASE NO.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR RELIEF PURSUANT
`TO 15 U.S.C. § 1071
`
`DREW HIRSHFELD in his capacity as
`17 Acting Director of the United States
`Patent and Trademark Office, and THE
`18 UNITED STATES PA TENT AND
`TRADEMARK OFFICE,
`
`19
`
`Defendants.
`
`20
`
`21
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 2 of 15 Page ID #:2
`
`1
`
`Plaintiff Snap Inc. ("Snap"), by its undersigned attorneys, Debevoise & Plimpton
`
`2 LLP, for its Complaint against Defendants Drew Hirshfeld, in his official capacity as the
`
`3 Acting Director of the United States Patynt and Trademark Office (the "Director") and
`
`4
`
`the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the "USPTO") alleges as follows:
`
`5
`
`6
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT:
`
`1.
`
`In 2016, Snap introduced the SPECTACLES brand of wearable digital video
`
`7 cameras to be used with its famous Snapchat app. The SPECTACLES product captures
`
`8
`
`images and, more recently, enables users to experience augmented reality (AR). The
`
`9 SPECTACLES name evokes an incongruity between an 18th century term for corrective
`
`10 eyewear and Snap's high-tech 21 st century smart glasses. SPECTACLES also is
`
`11
`
`suggestive of the camera's purpose, to capture and share unusual, notable, or entertaining
`
`12 scenes (i.e., "spectacles") and while also encouraging users to make "spectacles" of
`
`13
`
`themselves.
`
`14
`
`2.
`
`The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB'') affirmed the USPTO's
`
`15
`
`refusal to register the SPECTACLES trademark based on the remarkable position that
`
`16 "spectacles" is a generic term that the consuming public primarily understands to
`
`17 designate an entire class of goods (i.e., cameras), rather than the source of those goods.
`
`18 But the consuming public, the media, and Snap's competitors all refer to the type of
`
`19 products sold under the SPECTACLES mark as "smart glasses" or "camera glasses," not
`
`20 "spectacles." Moreover, the media and consuming public understands that
`
`21 SPECTACLES is a brand of smart glasses made by Snap.
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 3 of 15 Page ID #:3
`
`1
`
`3.
`
`For example, a December 8, 2021 article entitled " Snap is already delivering
`
`2 on the future Meta is promising" observes that "Spectacles won 't be alone for long.
`
`3 Facebook is working on its own pair of AR smartglasses .... Similarly, Google acquired
`
`4 smartglasses maker North last year in a move that could signal another attempt at an AR
`
`5 wearable .... And Apple has long been rumored to be planning to add a pair of
`
`6 smartglasses to its smartwatch and earbuds wearable family .. : .. " 1 Similarly, a
`
`7 December 2, 202 1 article reviewed "The Best 8 Smart Glasses of 2021 ." 2 The article
`
`8 explains that " [s]mart glasses are set to be the next big thing in technology ... that puts
`
`9 cameras and headphones into what look like normal sunglasses," and ranked
`
`10 SPECTACLES as the smart glasses that are "Best for Video." . These articles are
`
`11
`
`representative of the public ' s understanding that "spectacles" simply is not the word used
`
`12
`
`to refer to smart glasses.
`
`13
`
`4.
`
`Through this action, Snap appeals to this Court for a fair and full
`
`14 consideration of the public ' s understanding that SPECTACLES is not a generic term and
`
`15
`
`is entitled to registration on the Principal Register.
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`1 See https://qz.com/2099747/snap-is-offering-the-metaverse-while-meta-talks(cid:173)
`about-the-future/ (last visited January 4, 2022)
`2 See https://www.lifewire.com/best-smart-glasses-4172796 (last visited January 4,
`2022).
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 4 of 15 Page ID #:4
`
`1
`
`2
`
`PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff Snap Inc. is a corporation organized und~r the laws of the state of
`
`3 Delaware, with its principal place of business at 3000 31st Street, Santa Monica,
`
`4 California 90405.
`
`5
`
`6.
`
`Defendant Drew Hirshfeld is the Acting Director of the United States Patent
`
`6 and Trademark Office with an address at P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-
`
`7 1450.
`
`8
`
`7.
`
`Defendant United States Patent and Trademark Office is a federal agency
`
`9 within the United States Department of Commerce. The agency is located at 600 Dulany
`
`10 Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
`
`11
`
`8.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to
`
`12 Section 21(b) of the U.S. Trademark Act of 1946 (the "Lanham Act"), as amended, 15
`
`13 U.S.C. 1071(b), which provides that a party dissatisfied with a final decision of the
`
`14 Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB") may institute a new civil action in Federal
`
`15 District Court challenging such decision. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction
`
`16 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
`
`17
`
`9.
`
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(l)(C)
`
`18 because Plaintiff Snap has a principal place of business in this :district.
`
`19
`
`20
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`10.
`
`Snap is a camera company that believes that reinventing the camera
`
`21
`
`represents its greatest opportunity to improve the way that people live and communicate.
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 5 of 15 Page ID #:5
`
`1 Snap empowers people to express themselves, live in the moment, learn about the world,
`
`2 and have fun together.
`
`3
`
`11.
`
`Snap ' s flagship product, Snapchat, is a mobile application that helps people
`
`4 communicate visually with friends and family through short videos and images called
`
`5 Snaps, which they can create with the camera on their phone. _ln September 2016, Snap
`
`6 announced it was broadening its product and service offerings by selling a wearable
`
`7 digital video camera housed in a pair of fashionable sunglasses under the SPECTACLES
`
`8 brand. The SPECTACLES camera can connect seamlessly with the Snapchat app to
`
`9 capture photos and videos from a human perspective. Snap's SPECTACLES
`
`10 announcement received significant and widespread media attention, and was one of the
`
`11 most-watched tech product launches of the year.
`
`12
`
`12.
`
`Snap ' s SPECTACLES camera has been the subject of significant unsolicited
`
`13 media coverage and third-party recognition. Between September 24, 2016 and April 18,
`
`14 2017, Snap' s SPECTACLES v.l camera product garnered over 13,000 U.S.-based media
`
`15 articles, news stories, and other third-party media publications. The collective
`
`16 circulation, website visitors, and broadcast audience for media outlets covering
`
`17 SPECTACLES v. l in the U .S. resulted in an estimated one billion+ impressions. The
`
`18 publicity value of such media coverage was over $35 million based on the estimated price
`
`19
`
`that professional media buyers would pay for that amount of exposure for that particular
`
`20 outlet and factors , including the average cost per impression, length of article/segment,
`
`21 and engagement level. Snap ' s SPECTACLES v.3 camera generated over 650 U.S.-based
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 6 cit 15 Page ID #:6
`
`1 media articles, news stories and other third-party publications in a span of just two days
`
`2 (August 13-14, 2019). The estimated collective circulation, website visitors, and
`
`3 broadcast audience for media outlets covering SPECTACLES v.3 in the United States
`
`4 was over 1.7 billion people and resulted in an estimated 34 million impressions.
`
`5
`
`13.
`
`Snap also received numerous awards for its SPECTACLES camera and
`
`6 promotional campaigns. At the 2017 Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity,
`
`7
`
`the prestigious gathering honoring design and product innovation, SPECTACLES and the
`
`8 Snapbot vending machines, from which they were sold, won three gold Lions awards,
`
`9 with two in Product Design and one in Design. Snap also won Design bronze, along with
`
`10 a silver and bronze from the Mobile jury. Furthermore, the SPECTACLES camera
`
`11 product won "Hardware of the Year" and Snap's video promoting SPECTACLES won
`
`12 "Best Startup Video" at the 2017 Crunchies Awards, hosted by Tech Crunch, a leading
`
`13
`
`technology news publication. More recently, the SPECTACLES product won "Best
`
`14 Headworn Device" at the 2021 Auggie Awards presented by A WE, the leading
`
`15 augmented reality industry conference.
`
`16
`
`14.
`
`Snap has built a community for SPECTACLES that generates consistent
`
`1 7 consumer engagement, with more than 200,000 followers across its various
`
`18 SPECTACLES social media accounts.
`
`19
`
`15. Because the SPECTACLES camera is designed to integrate with Snap's
`
`20 famous Snapchat app, the association of SPECTACLES with the app significantly
`
`21
`
`increases the public recognition of SPECTACLES. Since its launch in 2011, the
`
`COM PLAINT
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 7 of 15 Page ID #:7
`
`1 Snapchat app has become one of the most popular smartphone applications in the world.
`
`2 As of Q3 2021 , approximately 306 million people, on average; use the Snapchat app
`
`3 every day. In the United States, 90% of the 13-24-year-old population, and 75% of the
`
`4 13- 34-year-old population uses Snapchat. As of Q4 2020, some five billion Snaps are
`
`5 created each day. Snap's many millions of registered users have shared over a trillion
`
`6 photo and video messages to date. Snap' s new generation SPECTACLES have
`
`7 augmented reality features , and, as of December 2021, Snapchatters use augmented
`
`8 reality on the Snapchat app more than 6 billion times per day, on average, and
`
`9 collectively have viewed Snap's Lenses (real-time augmented reality experiences) over
`
`10 3 .5 trillion times. According to the Apple App Store, the Snapchat app has been among
`
`11
`
`the world's seven most downloaded iOS apps for the last six consecutive years, from
`
`12 2016-2021 , including the world's most downloaded iOS app in 2016. This level of
`
`13 engagement by consumers contributes to the recognition of the SPECTACLES camera
`
`14 product, which is integrated with the Snapchat app and allows users to take pictures and
`
`15 videos and upload them to the Snapchat app.
`
`16
`
`17
`
`U.S. Trademark Application History
`
`16. On September 20, 2016, Snap filed a federal trademark application for
`
`18 SPECTACLES on an intent-to-use basis (Serial No. 87/177,292) (the "Word Mark
`
`19 Application") for use in connection with:
`
`20
`
`21
`
`Computer hardware; computer peripherals; wearable computer
`hardware; wearable computer peripherals; computer hardware
`and peripherals for remotely accessing, capturing; transmitting
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 8 of 15 Page ID #:8
`
`and displaying pictures, video, audio and data; downloadable
`computer software, namely, software for setting up,
`configuring, and controlling wearable computer hardware and
`peripherals; downloadable computer software and software
`applications for use in uploading, downloading, capturing,
`editing, storing, distributing and sharing photographic and
`video content and other digital data via global and local
`computer networks and via mobile devices; downJoadable
`multimedia files containing digital audio and video files
`featuring user generated images, videos, multimedia files , and
`other digital data, all in the fields of entertainment, photography
`and online social networking; computer software for accessing
`and transmitting data and content among consumer electronics
`devices and displays.
`
`17.
`
`On November 30, 2016, Snap amended its Word Mark Application to allege
`
`1
`
`2
`
`,.,
`
`.)
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`actual use.
`
`11
`
`18. On October 21 , 2016, Snap filed a federal trademark application for ~
`
`12 on an intent-to-use basis (Serial No. 87/211,997) (the "Stylized Mark Application" and
`
`13
`
`together with the Word Mark Application, the "Applications") for use in connection with:
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`Computer hardware; computer peripherals; wearable computer
`hardware; wearable computer peripherals; computer hardware
`and peripherals for remotely accessing, capturing, transmitting
`and displaying pictures, video, audio and data; downloadable
`computer software, namely, software for setting up,
`configuring, and controlling wearable computer hardware and
`peripherals; downloadable computer software and software
`applications for use in uploading, downloading, capturing,
`editing, storing, distributing and sharing photographic and
`video content and other digital data via global and local
`computer networks and via mobile devices; down1oadable
`multimedia files containing digital audio and video files
`featuring user generated images, videos, multimedia files, and
`other digital data, all in the fields of entertainment, photography
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 9 of 15 Page ID #:9
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`and online social networking; computer software for accessing
`and transmitting data and content among consumer electronics
`devices and displays .
`
`19. On November 30, 2016 Snap amended the Stylized Mark Application to
`
`4 allege actual use.
`
`5
`
`20. On December 27, 2016, the USPTO issued the first of several Office
`
`6 Actions refusing registration of the Applications on the ground of descriptiveness. Snap
`
`7
`
`timely filed its responses. On April 22, 2019 and April 24, 2019, the USPTO issued final
`
`8 Office Actions maintaining the descriptiveness refusals. Snap simultaneously filed
`
`9 Notices of Appeal and Requests for Reconsideration of the final Office Action, which
`
`10
`
`included a claim that, in the alternative, Snap's SPECTACLES mark had acquired
`
`11 distinctiveness under Section 2(f) of the Lanham Act.
`
`12
`
`21. The USPTO then issued a second non-final Office Action for each of the
`
`13 Applications on November 12, 2019 maintaining the refusal on descriptiveness grounds,
`
`14 and claiming Snap's Section 2(f) evidence was insufficient. These Office Actions also
`
`15
`
`included an "Advisory" notice that the SPECTACLES mark "appear[ ed] to be generic in
`
`16 connection with the identified goods and, therefore, incapable of functioning as a source-
`
`17
`
`identifier for Snap's goods." Snap again timely filed its responses, this time including
`
`18 voluminous new evidence in support of its Section 2(f) claim of acquired distinctiveness,
`
`19 and also argued against the genericness "advisory" notice.
`
`20
`
`22.
`
`Six days later, on May 18, 2020, the USPTO issued non-final Office
`
`21 Actions, formally refusing to register the Applications on the grounds SPECTACLES is
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 10 of 15 Page ID # :10
`
`1 generic, while still maintaining the descriptiveness refusal , in the alternative. The
`
`2 USPTO also rejected Snap ' s additional acquired distinctiveness evidence as insufficient.
`
`3 Specifically, the USPTO argued that Snap ' s SPECTACLES mark is so highly descriptive
`
`4
`
`that Snap ' s evidence seeking to establish that almost four years of use of this mark as a
`
`5 distinctive and well-known brand was irrelevant (and would still be insufficient upon a
`
`6 showing of five years ' use). Snap again timely filed its responses against the genericness
`
`7 and descriptiveness refusals and continued to submit new evidence in support of acquired
`
`8 distinctiveness-
`
`then based on more than four years of use.
`
`9
`
`23. On December 11 , 2020, the USPTO issued another final Office Action
`
`10 maintaining both the descriptiveness and genericness refusals and setting a deadline of
`
`11
`
`June 11 , 2021 to prepare a response to the final Office Actions. Before Snap could file
`
`12
`
`its responses, the TT AB, on April 23 , 2021 , resumed the ex pa.rte appeals for the
`
`13 Applications setting the deadline for Snap's appeal brief to be filed on June 22, 2021.
`
`14
`
`15
`
`The TT AB Decision
`
`24. On November 3, 202 1, following briefing, the TTAB affirmed the refusal to
`
`16
`
`register the Applications on the ground that the SPECTACLES mark is generic, and,
`
`17 alternatively, that it is highly descriptive and has not acquired distinctiveness.
`
`18
`
`25.
`
`In affirming the refusal to register, the TT AB erred by holding that
`
`19 SPECTACLES is generic for cameras and related software and hardware.
`
`20
`
`26. A generic term is the common descriptive name that designates an entire
`
`21 class of goods or services, rather than the producer of those goods or services.
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 11 of 15 Page ID #:11
`
`1
`
`27.
`
`SPECTACLES is not generic because it does not refer to an entire genus,
`
`2 class, or category of goods. The test for determining whether a mark is generic is its
`
`3 primary significance to the relevant public. The relevant category of goods described in
`
`4
`
`the Applications is cameras and related software and hardware components that are
`
`5 commonly and generically referred to as "smart glasses" or "camera glasses," not
`
`6 "spectacles." None of the specified goods in the Applications irefer to any description of
`
`7 eyewear or other optical instrument with a lens and frame used as a viewing aid.
`
`8
`
`28.
`
`Those in the relevant industry, competitors, the consuming public, and the
`
`9 news media describe the entire category or class of such goods as "cameras," "smart
`
`10 glasses," "camera glasses," or variations of these names. Moreover, third parties
`
`11
`
`recognize and refer to SPECTACLES as a camera product offered by Snap, not a
`
`12 category or class of goods.
`
`13
`
`29. The TTAB also erred in holding that SPECTACLES is descriptive for
`
`14 cameras and related software and hardware.
`
`15
`
`30. A descriptive term is one that imparts or conveys an immediate idea of the
`
`16
`
`ingredients, qualities, or characteristics of the goods. Whether a mark is descriptive is
`
`1 7 determined in relation to the goods or services for which registration is sought, not in the
`
`18 abstract. In contrast, a term is suggestive when it requires imagination, mature thought,
`
`19 and perception to reach a conclusion as to the nature of the goods.
`
`20
`
`31. The meaning of SPECTACLES is suggestive when considered in relation to
`
`21 Snap's camera product because it communicates a double entendre. The word
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 12 of 15 Page ID #: 12
`
`1 "spectacles" has two commonly understood meanings, making Snap 's SPECTACLES
`
`2 mark necessari ly distinctive. The most relevant and commonly understood connotations
`
`3 of "spectacles" as applied to Snap 's camera product are: (1) a device used to correct
`
`4 defects of vision or to protect the eyes that consists typically of a pair of glass or plastic
`
`5
`
`lenses and the frame by which they are held in place; and (2) something exhibited to view
`
`6 as unusual, notable, or entertaining, especially an eye-catching or dramatic public
`
`7 display. Snap' s SPECTACLES camera product creates a double entendre because it is,
`
`8 on the one hand, a high-definition digital camera housed in a plastic sunglass frame and,
`
`9 on the other hand, it is designed to capture and share unusual, notable, or entertaining
`
`10 scenes (i.e., "spectacles") and while also encouraging users to make "spectacles" of
`
`11
`
`themselves. This second definition of spectacles is a core marketing message for the
`
`12 SPECTACLES camera product, and it has been well documen~ed by the US news media.
`
`13
`
`32.
`
`SPECTACLES also is suggestive because it is incongruous with the
`
`14 underlying product-a high-tech camera product. The term "spectacles" is an old-
`
`15
`
`fashioned term popular in the 18th century. It is not often used today in the United
`
`16 States- especially by the younger demographic of consumers of Snap' s SPECTACLES
`
`17 camera product-but when used, it is almost always meant to describe corrective
`
`18 eyewear. This indicates that modem day usage of "spectacles" in the United States-
`
`19 especially among a younger demographic of consumers who are the relevant consumers
`
`20 of Snap's SPECTACLES camera product-is not commonly understood to mean
`
`21 eyeglasses, and certainly not a wireless-enabled video camera product.
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 13 of 15 Page ID #:13
`
`1
`
`33. Moreover, the highly stylized ~ mark in its distinctive form that is
`
`2 neither a recognized nor ubiquitous font (it was custom crafted for Snap) creates a
`
`3 commercial impression separate and apart from the word portion.
`
`4
`
`34. Even if SPECTACLES is descriptive and not inhyrently distinctive, there is
`
`5 significant evidence that it has acquired secondary meaning ((e., acquired
`
`6 distinctiveness), for the reasons described above in paragraphs: 10-15.
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF: ·
`Appeal from Decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
`Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1071(b) .·
`
`3 5.
`
`Snap repeats and realleges each and every allegation in the foregoing
`
`1 o paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
`
`11
`
`36.
`
`Snap appeals the erroneous November 3, 2021 decision of the Trademark
`
`12 Trial and Appeal Board in the matter of In re Snap Inc. , Ex Parte Appeal No. 87,177,232.
`
`13
`
`37. The November 3, 2021 TTAB decision is a final decision subject to review
`
`14 under Section 21 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1071.
`
`15
`
`38. The TTAB panel's conclusions of law are incorrect and its findings of fact
`
`16 are not supported by substantial evidence to warrant refusal of registration.
`
`17
`
`39.
`
`Snap has taken no appeal of the November 3, 2021 decision to the United
`
`18 States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
`
`19
`
`40.
`
`Snap seeks a de nova review of the TTAB's November 3, 2021 decision by
`
`20 civil action under Section 21(b) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1071(b).
`
`21
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 14 of 15 Page ID #:14
`
`1
`
`41.
`
`Snap seeks an order reversing the TTAB 's November 3, 2021 decision on
`
`2
`
`the basis that the primary significance of the term SPECTACL,ES as used in connection
`
`3 with cameras, wearable computing devices, computer hardware, and peripherals is as a
`
`4
`
`trademark, that the term SPECTACLES is not generic, and th~t the term SPECTACLES
`
`5
`
`is inherently distinctive, or in the alternative that the term SPECTACLES has gained
`
`6 secondary meaning pursuant to Section 2(f) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(£).
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Snap requests this Court enter judgment:
`
`1.
`
`Reversing the decision of the TTAB, dated November 3, 2021 , and directing
`
`10
`
`the Director forthwith to pass the Applications to publication for registration on the
`
`11 Principal Register; and
`
`2.
`
`Awarding Snap such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`DATED: January 5, 2022
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP
`
`By: Isl David H Bernstein
`David H. Bernstein
`650 California Street
`San Francisco, CA 94108
`Tel.: ( 415) 738-:5700
`Fax: ( 415) 644-5628
`dhbernstein@debevoise.com
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00085 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 15 of 15 Page ID #:15
`
`Jared I. Kagan
`(Pro Hae Vice forthcoming)
`Parker C. Eudy ·
`(Pro Hae Vice forthcoming)
`919 Third Avenue
`New York, NY 10022
`Tel.: (212) 909-6000
`Fax: (212) 909-6836
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Snap Inc.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`14
`
`

`

`CIVIL COVER SHEET
`I. (a) PLAINTIFFS ( Check box if yo u are representing yourself D )
`
`DEFENDANTS
`
`( Check box if you are representing yourself D )
`
`Snap Inc.
`
`Drew Hirshfeld in his capacity as ai:ting Director of the United States Patent and
`Trademark Office, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Los Angeles
`(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)
`
`County of Residence of Firs~ Listed Defendant Alexandria (City)
`(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
`
`(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number) If you are
`represen t ing yourself, provide the same information .
`Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
`650 California Street
`San Francisco, CA 94108
`(415) 738-5700
`II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in one box only.)
`D 3. Federal Question (U .S.
`D 1. U.S. Government
`
`Plaintiff
`
`Government Not a Party)
`
`0 2. U.S. Government
`Defendant
`
`D 4 . Diversity (Indicate Citizenship
`
`of Parties in Item 111)
`
`Attorneys (Firm Name, Addres$ and Telephone Number) If you are
`representing yourself, provide the same information .
`United States Patent and Tradema:rk Office
`600 Dulany Street
`Alexandria, Virginia 22314
`1-800-786-9199
`111. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES-For Diversity Cases Only
`(Place an X in one box for plaintiff and one for defendant)
`DEF
`PTF
`PTF
`DEF
`; Incorporated or Principal Place
`D 4
`D 1 D 1
`□ 4
`Citizen ofThis State
`' of Business in this State
`Citizen of Another State D 2 D 2 ! Incorporated and Principal Place D 5 D 5
`: of Business in Another State
`D 3 D 3 : Foreign Nation
`
`Citizen or Subject of a
`Foreign Country
`
`IV. ORIGIN (Place an X in one box only.)
`
`Proceeding
`
`State Court
`
`Appellate Court
`
`Reopened
`
`District (Specify)
`
`·
`
`6_ Multidistrict
`•
`1t1gat1on -
`Transfer
`
`0 1. Original D 2. Removed from D 3. Remanded from D 4. Reinstated or D 5. Transferred from Another D L' •
`V. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND: 0 Yes 0 No
`(Check "Ye s" only if demanded in complaint.)
`CLASS ACTION under F.R.Cv.P. 23: □ Yes 0 No
`0 MONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT: $
`VI. CAUSE OF ACTION (Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and write a brief statement of cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity.)
`This case is an appeal, pursuant to 1 S U.5.C. § 1071 (b), of a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board affirming the United States Patent and Trademark Office's
`refusal to register SPECTACLES as a trademark.
`
`8. Multidistrict
`
`D Litigation -
`
`Direct File
`
`PROPERTY RIGHTS
`D 820 Copyrights
`D 830 Patent
`D 835 Patent - Abbreviated
`New Drug Application
`0 840 Trademark
`D 880 Defend Trade Secrets Act
`of 2016 (DTSA)
`
`I
`
`I
`
`I
`
`Loan (Exe l. Vet.)
`
`153 Recovery of
`
`Vet. Benefits
`
`VII. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in one box only).
`I
`PRISONER PETITIONS
`OTHER STATUTES
`CONTRACT
`IMMIGRATION
`REAL PROPERTY CONT.
`Habeas Corpus:
`□ 37S False Claims Act □ 11 O Insurance
`462 Naturalization
`□ 240 Torts to Land
`□
`D 463 Alien Detainee
`Application
`□ 245 Tort Product
`376Qui Tam
`□ 120 Marine
`0 (3 1 USC 3729(a))
`510 Motions to Vacate
`Liability
`465 Other
`□
`D 130 Miller Act
`□
`Sentence
`Immigration Actions
`□ 290 All Other Real
`400 State
`□ 530 General
`□ Reapportionment
`Property
`TORTS
`140 Negotiable
`PERSONAL PROPERTY □ 535 Death Penalty
`□ Instrument
`TORTS
`□ 410 Antitrust
`Other:
`PERSONAL INJURY
`1 50 Recovery of
`□ 370 Other Fraud
`□ 430 Banks and Banking
`□ Overpayment & □ 31 O Airplane
`□ 540 Mandamus/Other
`□ 371 Truth in Lending
`Enforcement of
`450 Commerce/ ICC
`315 Airplane
`□
`SOCIAL SECURITY
`Judgment
`□
`Rates/ Etc.
`□ 550 Civil Rights
`Product Liability
`380 Other Personal
`0 861 HIA (1395ff)
`□ 460 Deportation
`320 Assault, Libel & □ Property Damage □ 555 Prisqn Condition
`□ 151 Medicare Act
`□ Slander
`D 862 Black Lung (923)
`470 Racketeer lnflu-
`□
`385 Property Damage
`152 Recovery of
`enced & Corrupt Org.
`560 Civil Detainee
`330 Fed. Employers' □
`0 863 DIWC/DIWW (405 (g))
`Product Liability
`□ 480 Consumer Credit □ Defaulted Student □ Liability
`□ Conditions of
`BANKRUPTCY
`Confinement
`FORFEITl.,!RE/PENAL TY 0 864 SSID Title XVI
`485 Telephone
`□ 340 Marine
`□
`422 Appeal 28
`Consumer Protection Act
`0 865 RSI (405 (g))
`345 Marine Product □
`D Overpayment of □ Liability
`USC 158
`625 Drug Related
`□ 490 Cable/Sat TV
`423 Withdrawal 28 D Seizure of Property 21
`160 Stockholders' □ 350 Motor Vehicle □ USC 157
`FEDERAL TAX SUITS
`850 Securities/ Com-
`USC 881
`□
`0 690Other
`modities/ Exchange
`□
`355 Motor Vehicle
`870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or
`CIVIL RIGHTS
`Suits
`□
`□
`890 Other Statutory
`Product Liability
`Defendant)
`□ Actions
`LABOR
`□ 440 Other Civil Rights
`□ 190 Other
`871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC
`360 Other Personal
`D 710 Fair Labor Standards □ 7609
`□ Injury
`Contract
`□ 891 Agricultural Acts
`□ 441 Voting
`Act
`.
`D 195 Contract
`362 Personal Injury-
`0 720 Labor/Mgmt.
`893 Environmental
`□
`□ 442 Employment
`□ Matters
`Med Malpratice
`Product Liability
`Relations
`443 Housing/
`D 895 Freedom of Info. D 196 Franchise
`365 Personal Injury- □
`□ Product Liability
`Accommodations D 740 Railway Labor Act
`Act
`REAL PROPERTY
`445 American with
`D 896 Arbitration
`D 751 Family and Medical
`367 Health Care/
`D 210 Land
`□ Disabilities-
`□ Pharmaceutical
`Leave Act
`Employment
`899 Admin. Procedures
`Condemnation
`446 American with D 790 Other Labor
`D Act/Review of Appeal of D 220 Foreclosure
`□
`Litigation
`Disabilities-Other
`Agency Decision
`D 950 Constitutionality of D 230 Rent Lease & □ Personal Injury
`D 791 Employee Ret. Inc.
`□ 448 Education
`Security,Act
`
`State Statutes
`
`Eiectment
`
`Personal Injury
`Product Liability
`368 Asbestos
`
`Product Liabilitv
`
`FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
`CV-71 (10/20)
`
`Case Number:
`
`CIVIL COVER SHEET
`
`Page 1 of 3
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-6',Vr~T~<clrslfflfcrfct>ulfi!~r-9rw'~R~fQ, c?A2{F~RrfiR-ge ID # :17
`CIVIL COVER SHEET
`
`VIII. VENUE: Your answers to the quest ions below wi ll determine the division of the Court to which t his case wil l be i_nitially assigned. Thi s initial assignment is subject
`o c ange, In accor ance wI
`rt' G
`I O d
`view b t he C
`f
`C
`I . t Notice of Remova l
`h
`d
`·t h th C
`e OU s enera
`r ers, upon re
`OU o your ompain or
`rt
`y
`
`QUESTION A: Was this case removed
`from state court?
`□ Yes 0 No
`
`If "no, " skip to Question B. If "yes," check t he
`box to the right t hat applies, enter the
`corresponding division in response to
`Question E, below, and contin ue from there.
`
`STATE CASE WAS PENDING IN THE COUNTY OF:
`
`INITIAL DIVISION IN CACD IS:
`
`□ Los Angeles, Ve ntu ra, Santa Barbara, or San Luis Obispo
`Orange
`□
`□ Riversi de or San Bernardino
`
`Western
`
`Southern
`
`Eastern
`
`QUESTIONS: Is the United States, or B. 1. Do 50% or more of the defendants who reside in
`the dist rict reside in Orange Co.?
`one of its agencies or employees, a
`PLAINTIFF in this action?
`□ Yes 0 No
`
`check one of the boxes to the right
`
`➔
`
`B.2. Do 50% or more of t he defendants w ho reside in
`
`YES. Your ca!ie will initia lly be assig ned to t he Sout hern Division.
`□ Enter "Southern" in response to Question E, below, and continue
`from there.
`
`□ NO. Continu~ to Question 8.2.
`YES. Your cas~ will init ially be assigned to the Eastern Division.
`
`If "no, " skip to Question C. If "yes," answer
`Qu est ion 8.1, at right.
`
`the district reside in Riversi de an d/ or Sa n Bernardino □ Ent er "Easter!)" in response to Qu estion E, below, and contin ue
`
`Counties? (Consider t he two count ies tog ether.)
`
`from there.
`
`check one of the boxes to the right
`
`➔
`
`NO. You r case w ill initially be assigned to the Western Division.
`□ Enter "Wester.n" in response to Qu estion E, below, and continue
`from there.
`
`QUESTIONC: Is the United States, or C. 1. Do 50% or more of t he plaintiffs who reside in the
`district reside in Orange Co.?
`one of its agencies or employees, a
`DEFENDANT in this action?
`0 Yes □ No
`
`check one of the boxes to the right
`
`➔
`
`YES. Your case wi ll initially be assig ned to the Southern Division.
`□ Enter "South~rn" in response to Qu estion E, below, and continue
`from there.
`
`0 NO. Continue to Question C.2.
`
`If "no," skip to Question D. If "yes," an swer
`Question C. l , at right.
`
`C.2. Do 50% or more of t he plaintiffs who res ide in the
`district reside in Riverside and/or San Bern ardino
`Counti e