Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA137794
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`04/26/2007
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`91174560
`Plaintiff
`Rock Rebel
`Rock Rebel
`Rock Rebel
`PO Box 2205
`La Habra, CA 90632
`UNITED STATES
`ERIC J. GOODMAN
`GOODMAN LAW GROUP, PC
`695 TOWN CENTER DRIVE , 14TH FL
`COSTA MESA, CA 92626
`UNITED STATES
`Motion to Suspend for Civil Action
`Amanda McLaughlin
`uspto@bmkglawyers.com
`/Amanda McLaughlin/
`04/26/2007
`Motion to Suspend Proceedings 4-26-07.pdf ( 26 pages )(1019537 bytes )
`
`Proceeding
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`Attachments
`
`

`
` l
`
`llL
`
`5:
`EE1
`
`3i E
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`ROCK REBEL
`
`Opposer,
`
`v.
`
`JOHN N. OLEANDER,
`
`Applicant.
`
`
`Opposition No. 91/174,560
`
`Mark:
`
`ROCK REBEL
`
`MOTION TO SUSPEND PENDING INTERPARTES PROCEEDING
`
`Opposer, Rock Rebel
`
`(“Opposer”), moves to suspend the above-captioned
`
`proceeding pending disposition of the federal action, Case No. SACV07-332
`
`JVS(MLGx), filed by Opposer against Applicant, John N. Oleander (“Applicant”) in the
`
`U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
`
`Opposer adopted the trademark ROCK REBEL in 2004 and has applied for
`
`federal registration of its trademark ROCK REBEL for online retail store services
`
`(Application Serial No. 77,108,580 in Class 35) and for apparel (Application Serial No.
`
`77,108,594 in Class 25).
`
`Opposer has filed a Notice of Opposition to Application Serial No. 78,850,361,
`
`for ROCK REBEL in Classes 14, 25 and 26, claiming prior use of the mark ROCK
`
`REBEL. Believing itself to be the first user of the mark throughout the United States,
`
`Applicant has filed a civil actioncharging Opposer With infringement of its trademark
`
`rights. The pleadings in this Civil Action are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`Disposition of the civil action will determine Who has superior rights to the
`
`trademark, ROCK REBEL, and whether Applicant is entitled to register the same.
`
`

`
`Opposer contacted Applicant’s counsel to request that Applicant stipulate to
`
`suspension of the opposition proceedings pending the disposition of the above-referenced
`
`civil action, but Applicanfs counsel declined to so stipulate. Accordingiy, Opposer
`
`respectfully submits this unilateral motion and, in the interest of efficiency and judicial
`
`economy, requests that that all further proceedings in Opposition No. 91/ 174,560 be
`
`suspended pending disposition of Case No. SACV07-3 32 IVS (MLGX).
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`BMKG Lawyers, LLP
`jka Goodman Law Group, PC
`2020 Main Street, Suite 600
`Irvine, CA 92618
`
`Dated: April 26
`
`in/
`By: /Amanda I. McLau
`Amanda J. McLaughlin
`Attorneys for Opposer, Rock Rebei
`
`

`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and complete copy of the foregoing POWER OF
`
`ATTORNEY was served upon counsel for Applicant by depositing one copy thereof in
`
`the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid, on April 26, 2007, addressed as
`
`follows:
`
`James G. O’Nei11
`
`KLEIN, O’NEILL & SINGH
`Suite 204 43 Corporate Park
`Irvine, CA 92606
`
`By: /Amanda McLaughlin /
`Amanda McLaughlin
`
`E
`
`
`
`E
`
`
`
`!.
`
`4T-».vap.-—v—._=.
`
`

`
`r-di-A1-‘©©O0--1O\U1-l>-U-3l\J!-*
`
`r—a l\J
`
`I--I L»)
`
`>---- -D
`
`>---L U1
`
`Eric J. Goodman (State Bar No. 210694
`Amanda J. McLau hlin (State Bar No. 23376)
`David A. Berste1n%State Bar No. 204472)
`GOODMAN LAW _GROUP, PC
`695 Town Center Drijve, 14th Floor
`Costa Mesa, California 92626
`Telephone: 714) 754-0200
`Facsimile: ( 14) 754-0500
`daVid@goodmanlawyers.Corn
`
`Attorne s for Plaintiffs
`Kevin hunell and Bella Hana Sybirski
`
`_)
`
`_
`
`r,.»-.,,,..,
`mi:
`:_
`
`.
`
`;:
`
`s;;.$.~.
`
`~..
`"3"
`
`’
`
`-
`
`_
`
`'
`
`.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`KEVIN THUNELL and BELLA HANA
`SYBIRSKI, a partnership,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`VS-
`
`_
`_
`,
`JOHN N. OLANDER, an individual;
`OLANDER ENTERPRISES: INC» 3
`California corporation, and DOES 1
`through 10’
`
`Defendam
`
`SACV07-332 JVS(MLGx)
`
`Case No.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
`INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`1. False Desi nation of
`Origin/Fe era] Unfair
`Com etition Under 15 U.S.C. §
`1125 a)
`2. Federal Trademark Dilution
`Under 15 U_S_C_ § 1125(c)(1)
`3. Violation of the Anti-
`§¥&%£i?.“.“ELlgC°“S“m“’
`4. Unfair Competition in Violation
`of California Business &
`Professions Code § 17200, et seq.
`5. False Advertising in Violation of
`California Business &
`Professions Code § 17500, et seq.
`6. Trademark Infriu ement in
`Violation of Bus.
`Prof. Code §
`14320, et se . and Trademark
`Dilution in £\I7iolation of Bus. &
`Prof. Code §§ 14330, et seq.
`7. Violation of the California Anti-
`Phishing Act, Bus. & Prof. Code
`Sections §§22948, et seq.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiffs KEVIN THUNELL and BELLA HANA SYBIRSKI (hereinafter
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`1
`
`
`
`.1
`é
`
`\-
`o
`.9
`
`E?-<r
`g__\—
`9.9(BI-
`30«as
`‘E
`gm
`E0
`8%00
`(pl-LO
`anno
`
`
`
`
`
`CostaMesa,California92626
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14”‘Floor
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`“Plair1tiffs”) file this Complaint to complain and allege as follows:
`
`NATURE OF CLAIMS
`
`3-—*l—-3
`
`n---a IQ
`
`
`
`
`
`CostaMesa,California92626
`
`r—-:--3---a-—-rdr--r--A
`
`>-*®\O0O*~JO\U1-Ilka-3l\.J
`E300‘-IONUI-ILL»)
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this action under Section 43 (15 U.S.C. §ll25) of the Lanham
`
`Act to secure damages and equitable relief against JOHN N. OLANDER, an
`
`individual and OLANDER ENTERPRISES,
`
`INC.,
`
`for engaging in trademark
`
`infringement and deceptive acts or practices in connection with the manufacturing,
`
`advertising, rnarketing, distribution, offering and sale in the United States of
`
`clothing and fashion accessories sold under the trademark ROCK REBEL.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`_
`
`2.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the Lanham Act claims set forth below by
`
`virtue of 15 U.S.C. §l051, et seq. Personal jurisdiction over Defendants JOHN N.
`
`OLANDER and OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC. is proper for the reason that,
`
`inter alia, (1) Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER and OLANDER ENTERPRISES,
`
`INC. operate their business within California and specifically within this judicial
`
`district at 1225 Puerta Del Sol, Unit 300, San Clemente, California 92673;
`
`(2)
`
`Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER and OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC. direct
`
`their sales of ROCK REBEL clothing and accessories to residents of California and
`
`specifically target customers within this judicial district;
`
`(3) Defendants JOHN N.
`
`OLANDER and OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC. earn revenue from sales, both
`
`retail and wholesale, to California residents; (4) Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER
`
`and OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC. have an office and hold bank accounts
`
`Within California;
`
`(5) Defendants
`
`JOHN N. OLANDER and OLANDER
`
`ENTERPRISES,
`
`INC.
`
`operate
`
`a
`
`web
`
`site
`
`available
`
`nationally,
`
`www.r0ckrebelshop.c0m, that actively targets residents of California; and (6) the
`
`alleged infringing and unfair competitive activities occurred within California and
`
`Within this judicial district.
`
`3.
`
`Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 (b) and (c) in that the
`
`Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER and OLANDER ENTERPRISES,
`
`INC. do
`
`business, market, distribute, offer and/or sell products and services in this district
`
`2
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroupPC695TownCenterDrive,14"‘Floor
`
`
`
`
`
`CostaMesa,California92626
`
`and a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims stated
`
`herein have occurred and are occurring Within this judicial district.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs KEVIN THUNELL and BELLA HANA SYBlRSKI are the
`
`exclusive partners of a partnership organized under the laws of the State of
`
`California with their principal place of business located at 2100 South Magnolia
`
`Court, La Habra, California 90631.
`
`5.
`
`Defendant JOHN N. OLANDER (hereinafter “OLANDER”) is an individual
`
`doing business in California as ROCK REBEL with a principal business address of
`
`1225 Puerta Del Sol, Unit 300, San Clemente, California 92673.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant OLANDER ENTERPRISES,
`
`INC.
`
`(hereinafter “OEI”),
`
`is a
`
`corporation organized under the laws of the State of California with its principal
`
`place of business located at 1225 Puerta Del Sol, Unit 300, San Clemente, California
`
`92673.
`
`7.
`
`Defendant OEI is now, and at all times mentioned in this Complaint was
`
`formed and managed by Defendant OLANDER. Defendant OLANDER is liable for
`
`the acts of Defendant OE} alleged in this Complaint as its alter ego. Recognition of
`
`the privilege of separate existence would promote injustice because Defendant
`
`OLANDER organized and controlled Defendant OEI so that it is now, and at all
`
`times mentioned in this Complaint was, merely an instrumentality, agency, conduit,
`
`or adjunct of Defendant OLANDER and Defendant OLANDER,
`
`in bad" faith,
`
`dominated and controlled Defendant OEI such that Defendant OLANDER and
`
`Defendant OEI are jointly and severally liable for the acts complained of in this
`
`\OOO-~]O\U1-lb-L>Jl\J>--‘
`
`10
`
`1-2
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`2l
`
`22
`
`23
`
`Complaint.
`
`24
`
`8.
`
`Defendant OBI is, and at all times herein mentioned Was, a mere shell,
`
`25
`
`instrurnentality, and conduit through which Defendant OLANDER carried on his
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`business exactly as he had conducted it previous to formation, exercising complete
`
`control and dominance of such business to such an extent that any individuality or
`
`separateness of Defendant OEI and Defendant OLANDER does not, and at all times
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`3
`
`

`
`E
`
`herein mentioned did not, exist.
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiffs are unaware of the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued
`
`herein as DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. Therefore, Plaintiffs sue said DOES, and
`
`each of them, by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and
`
`thereon allege,
`
`that DOES 1
`
`through 10, and each of them, are in some way
`
`associated with co-defendants and/or alleging similar claims of infringement against
`
`Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs pray that their true names and capacities, when ascertained,
`
`may be incorporated by appropriate amendment.
`
`10.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believes, and based thereon allege, that at all times
`
`herein mentioned, each and every Defendant was the agent, servant, employee, joint
`
`Venturer, partner, subsidiary, and/or co—conspirator of each other Defendant, and
`
`that, in performing or failing to perform the acts herein alleged, each was acting
`
`individually as well as through and in the foregoing alleged capacity and within the
`course and scope of such agency, employment, joint Venture, partnership, subsidiary
`
`and/or conspiracy, and each other Defendant ratified and affirmed the acts and
`
`omissions of the other Defendants. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe that
`
`each Defendant, in taking the actions alleged herein and/or ratifying the actions
`
`alleged herein, acted within the course and scope of such authority and, at the same
`
`time, for their own financial and individual advantage, as Well as in the course and
`
`scope of such employment, agency and as an alter ego therein.
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiffs are the founders and owners of ROCK REBEL, an online retailer
`
`established in December 2004 who specializes in premium brand name clothing
`
`labels. Plaintiffs own all rights, title and interest in the trademark “ROCK REBEL”
`
`which is the subject of United States Trademark Application Nos. 77/ 108,580
`
`(hereinafter “580 application”) and 77/108,594 (hereinafter “S94 application”).
`
`Plaintiffs’ first use of the ROCK REBEL mark in commerce in International Class
`
`35 (580 application) occurred on December 31, 2004. Based upon Plaintiffs’
`
`continued use of the ROCK REBEL mark, on February 15, 2007, Plaintiffs filed the
`
`ED‘V.'JOO‘-JONLJI-I2-L»Jl\3|—‘
`
`p._A
`
`|-—u|
`
`>—A {U
`
`l—* La-J
`
`+—k -P-
`
`>-—- L)‘:
`
`
`
`PH‘I---4--1ON
`
`>—t 00
`
`r—- KO
`
`[0 CD
`
`[\-3 )—=
`
`I0[0
`
`l\JLa.)
`
`IO-13
`
`[0 U’!
`
`[0 O\
`
`[O-J
`
`l\3 00
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14"‘Floor
`
`
`
`
`
`CostaMesa,California92626
`
`

`
`594 application for an intend to use in International Class 25 for fleece pullover,
`
`hats, jackets, knit shirts, pants, shorts, sweat shirts, sweaters and t-shirts.
`
`12. As a result of the extensive, exclusive and continued use of the ROCK
`
`REBEL mark in connection with its online retail store, customers and consumers
`
`have come to recognize and identify the ROCK REBEL mark as representative of
`
`quality products provided by Plaintiffs. The ROCK REBEL mark has become a
`
`valuable asset of Plaintiffs as well as a symbol of their goodwill and positive
`
`reputation.
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that Defendants,
`
`and each of them, are infringing on Plaintiffs’ federal and state statutory and
`
`common law trademark rights in the mark, ROCK REBEL, by,
`
`inter alia, (1)
`
`1 2 3 4 5
`
`6 7 8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14"‘FloorCostaMesa,
`
`
`
`California92626
`
`12 manufacturing, advertising, marketing, distributing, offering and selling in the
`
`13 United States clothing and fashion accessories sold under the trademark ROCK
`
`14 REBEL, (2) registering and operating a website, wwwrockrebelshop.com, utilizing
`
`15
`
`15
`
`17
`
`18
`
`the trademark ROCK REBEL, and, (3) in the case of Defendant OLANDER,
`
`registering and utilizing the mark ROCK REBEL as a fictitious business name.
`
`FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN/FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION
`
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125121)
`19
`20 Against Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER, OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`and DOES I through 10, Inclusive
`
`21
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege each and every factual allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1
`
`through 13, inclusive, and incorporates them by reference herein.
`
`15. Defendants’ unauthorized use of the ROCK REBEL mark, or marks
`confusingly similar
`thereto,
`in connection with the marketing, advertising,
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`promotion, offering for sale and selling of their goods constitutes unfair competition
`
`and false designation of origin in Violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanhain Act, 15
`
`U.S.C. §l l25(a), because Defendants’ use suggests a false designation of the origin
`
`22
`
`23
`
`4
`
`5
`
`2 2
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`5
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`,r..rw,.,-.171-.--....,...-...__.____
`
`

`
`li
`
`3.ii1..
`
`1:
`
`
`
`
`
`of their goods.
`
`16. As a direct and legal result of Defendants’ unauthorized use of the ROCK
`
`REBEL mark, or marks confusingly similar hereto, Defendants have damaged and
`
`will continue to damage Plaintiffs’ goodwill and reputation and have caused, and are
`
`likely to continue to cause, a loss of profits for Plaintiffs. Defendants’ actions have
`
`caused, and will continue to cause, irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and to the public,
`
`who is confused by Defendants’ unauthorized use of the ROCK REBEL mark, or
`
`marks confusingly similar thereto, unless restrained and enjoined by this Court.
`
`Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to prevent Defendants from continuing
`
`their infringing actions and from injuring Plaintiffs.
`
`17.
`
`As a further direct and legal result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have
`
`been damaged and will continue to sustain damage and is entitled to receive
`
`compensation arising from their lost profits and efforts necessary to minimize and/or
`
`prevent customer and consumer confusion, in an amount to be proven at the time of
`
`trial.
`
`In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to disgorge Defendants’ profits, and are
`
`entitled to interest and to their attorney’s fees and costs in bringing this action, all in
`
`an amount to be proven at the time of trial. Plaintiffs are further entitled to
`
`injunctive relief as set forth above, and to all other and further forms of relief this
`
`Court deems appropriate.
`
`18.
`
`The damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result of the conduct alleged herein
`
`should be trebled in accordance with 15 U.S.C. §l 1 l7(b).
`
`SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`FEDERAL TRADEMARK DILUTION UNDER 15 U.S.C.
`
`1125 c 1
`
`Against Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER, OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`
`and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive
`
`19.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege each and every factual allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1
`
`through 18, inclusive, and incorporates them by reference herein.
`
`20.
`
`Plaintiffs have invested substantial financial resources to market the ROCK
`
`REBEL mark.
`
`As a result, the ROCK REBEL mark has become “famous” and
`
`K000‘-]O\U'1-I3-L.»->t\J>*--*
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`6
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC595TownCenterDrive,14"‘FloorCostaMesa,
`
`
`
`Caiifornia92626
`
`

`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14‘Floor
`
`
`
`
`
`CostaMesa,California92626
`
`“distinctive” pursuant to Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(c).
`
`21.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believes and thereon alleges, that notwithstanding
`
`Defendants’ knowledge of Plaintiffs’ common law rights in the ROCK REBEL
`
`mark, Defendants have commercially used, reproduced, copied or colorably imitated
`
`the ROCK REBEL mark, or marks confusingly similar hereto, in connection with
`
`the sale, offering for sale, distribution and/or advertising of goods in a manner
`
`which has caused and will likely continue to cause confusion, mistake or deception
`
`among the purchasing public as
`
`to the source of the goods and services.
`
`Defendants’ conduct in this regard is likely to dilute the distinctive qualities of the
`
`ROCK REBEL mark by lessening the capacity of such mark to identify and
`
`distinguish Plaintiffs’ goods in the marketplace, and has resulted in an actual present
`
`injury to the ROCK REBEL mark, in violation of Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act,
`
`15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
`
`22.
`
`As a direct and legal result of Defendants’ unauthorized use of the ROCK
`
`REBEL mark, or marks confusingly similar hereto, Defendants have damaged and
`
`will continue to damage Plaintiffs’ goodwill and reputation and have caused, and are
`
`likely to continue to cause, a loss of profits for Plaintiffs. Defendants’ actions have
`
`caused, and will continue to cause, irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and to the public,
`
`who is confused by Defendants’ unauthorized use of the ROCK REBEL mark, or
`
`marks confusingly similar thereto, unless restrained and enjoined by this Court.
`
`Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to prevent Defendants from continuing
`
`their infringing actions and from injuring Plaintiffs.
`
`23. As a further direct and legal result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have
`
`$©0O‘-JUNK)!-hUJl\)|—‘
`
`r--I
`
`[11
`
`fi—d
`
`»—t KN)
`
`l-—t U3
`
`I--a 43-
`
`D---i U’1
`
`l—‘%‘-JO\
`
`>—~ O0
`
`r--s \D
`
`[0CD
`
`l\-3 r-mt
`
`{Q[Q
`
`[*0 La»)
`
`been damaged and will continue to sustain damage and is entitled to receive
`
`[0-12-
`
`compensation arising from their lost profits and efforts necessary to minimize and/or
`
`B3 U1
`
`prevent customer and consumer confusion, in an amount to be proven at the time of
`
`B.) O\
`
`E\.) --J
`
`I0 00
`
`trial.
`
`In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to disgorge Defendants’ profits, and are
`
`entitled to interest and to their attorney’s fees and costs in bringing this action, all in
`
`an amount to be proven at the time of trial. Plaintiffs are further entitled to
`
`7
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`

`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14"‘FloorCostaMesa,
`
`
`
`California92626
`
`injunctive reiief as set forth above, and to all other and further forms of relief this
`
`Court deems appropriate.
`
`24.
`
`The damages sustained by Plaintiffs as a result of the conduct alleged herein
`
`should be trebled in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 1117(b).
`
`THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`VIOLATION OF THE ANTLCYBERSQ QUATTING
`
`CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
`
`Against Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER, OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`
`and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive
`
`25.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege each and eveiy allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through
`
`24, inclusive, and incorporate each by reference herein.
`
`26.
`
`Plaintiffs’ mark ROCK REBEL is distinctive and has become associated with
`
`the ROCK REBEL sales of clothing through online sales.
`
`27.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe that Defendants acquired the Website
`
`www.rocl<rebelshop.com with the bad faith intent to profit from Plaintiffs’ ROCK
`
`REBEL trademark, using the domain name to harm Plaintiffs’ goodwill as a means
`
`to induce the use of their competing goods.
`
`28. Defendants’ registration of the www.rockrebelsho;g.con1 domain name is
`
`prohibited due to its confusing sirnilarity to the Plaintiffs’ ROCK REBEL
`
`trademark. Consumers are erroneously attracted to and erroneously led to believe-
`
`that Defendants’ domain name and website originate With, or is sponsored or
`
`otherwise approved by, Plaintiffs.
`
`29. As a legal result of Defendants actions, Plaintiffs have suffered and will
`
`continue to suffer great damage to their business, goodwill, reputation, and profits.
`
`30. Unless restrained and enjoined by this Court, Defendants’ wrongful acts will
`
`continue to cause irreparable injury to Plaintiffs, both during the pendency of this
`
`“action and thereafter. Therefore, this Court should enter orders preliminarily and
`
`permanently enjoining Defendants, and their principals, officers, agents, employees,
`
`\DO0'~lC\U!-I3-LaJl\J
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`COMPLAINT‘ FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`8
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroupPC695TownCenterDrive,14"‘Floor
`
`
`
`
`
`CostaMesa,California92626
`
`and others acting in concert with them, from directly or indirectly making further
`
`use of the www.rockrebelshop.co1n domain name and/or any other domain names
`
`that are confusingly similar to, or dilutive of, Plaintiffs’ ROCK REBEL trademark.
`
`31.
`
`Plaintiffs are further entitled to an order from this Court requiring Defendants
`
`to forfeit, cancel or transfer to Plaintiffs the registration of www.rocl<rebelshop.corn
`
`domain name and any other domain names that infringe or dilute Plaintiffs’ ROCK
`
`REBEL trademark.
`
`32.
`
`Plaintiffs are further entitled to recover damages sustained in consequence of
`
`Defendants’ wrongful conduct, in an amount to be determined, and to recover their
`
`attorneys’ fees and other costs therein. Based upon the circumstances of this case,
`
`including the willful, deliberate and intentional nature of Defendants’ conduct,
`
`including the extent of their unlawful conduct, Plaintiffs are further entitled,
`
`pursuant
`
`to 15 U.S.C. 1l17(d),
`
`to recover statutory damages in excess of
`
`$100,000.00.
`
`FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`UNFAIR COMPETITION IN VIOLATION OF
`
`BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE § 17200, ET SE! 1.
`
`Against Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER, OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`
`and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive
`
`33.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege each and every factual allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1
`
`through 32, inclusive, and incorporates them by reference herein.
`
`34.
`
`The conduct of Defendants as alleged herein has the capacity to deceive the
`
`public, and constitute unfair methods of competition. Furthermore, this conduct
`
`constitutes an unlawful, unfair or fraudulent act or practice in the conduct or
`
`furnishing of a business, trade or service in California pursuant to California’s
`
`Unfair Competition Law, California Business and Professions Code §17200
`
`(“UCL”), as well as the common law of the State of California.
`
`35.
`
`Plaintiffs are entitled to restitution of any monies obtained by Defendants as a
`
`5\DOO--1O\KJ*I-I5-U310!--*
`
`pa H
`
`>— I\-)
`
`1-—-I DJ
`
`r-.-A -I3
`
`5...: L)‘:
`
`r--A ON
`
`r-A ‘-4
`
`>— 00
`
`r—a \D
`
`[O O
`
`IN) >—1
`
`[0[Q
`
`l\JLa.)
`
`N-I3
`
`l\) U‘:
`
`['0 C\
`
`[Q \]
`
`l\.) 00
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CT,-»v::.-«~..../W-,t,,,,,,...~,,..,.,.,.,.,.,.,.w+r—m~_.44_,AA
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`V.W_fl..sz9-*-—-a-.~»—«-,q—--i-.~.-w-.-:~s—-~«~——:-4,.-.~-......,..m.-*.‘»"F"'."~Y*7&‘\v4‘.<2."‘:.c....«;.,:.m_.......
`
`
`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive.14"‘FloorCostaMesa,
`
`
`
`California92626
`
`direct and legal result of the violations of the UCL and common law, and reasonable
`
`attorneys’ fees under California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5.
`
`36.
`
`The wrongful acts of Defendants, as alleged herein, unless restrained and
`
`enjoined by order of this Court, will cause great and irreparable injury to the general
`
`public and to Plaintiffs, their business, reputation and goodwill. Plaintiffs have no
`
`adequate remedy at law for the injuries that have been or will continue to be
`
`sustained in this action.
`
`FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`FALSE ADVERTISING IN VIOLATION OF
`
`CALIFORNIA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE §17500 Et Seq.
`
`Against Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER, OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`
`and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive
`
`37.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege each and every factual allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1
`
`through 36, inclusive, and incorporates them by reference herein.
`
`38.
`
`The actions of Defendants are unfair and unlawful, and also violate California
`
`statutory law,
`
`including without limitation, California Business and Professions
`
`Code §§ 17500, et seq.
`
`39.
`
`As a result of the Defendants’ false and misleading advertising, potential and
`
`actual consumers have been, and will continue to be, misled about the source and
`
`legitimacy of merchandise being wrongfully marketed and advertised in association
`
`with Plaintiffs’ name, marks, and image. The Defendants knew or should have
`
`known that the advertising Was untrue and misleading.
`
`40. As a result of the above-described conduct, Defendants have been, and will
`
`continue to be, unjustly enriched in profits,
`
`income and i1l—gotten gains at the
`
`5\OOO--lO\U'I-|>U~>l\3>--‘
`
`pi
`
`p_.A
`
`+—t l\)
`
`J--I U3
`
`r--A -I5
`
`>--L U1
`
`l—*l—‘--ION
`
`2--A 00
`
`1-1- \O
`
`[*0CD
`
`l\J >-wt
`
`l\).l\)9910
`
`[Q-53-
`
`expense of the Plaintiffs and California consumers.
`
`I\.) L)‘:
`
`l\-7O\
`
`[Q '-J
`
`l\3 00
`
`41.
`
`As a further result of the above—described conduct, Plaintiffs have been, and
`
`will continue to be, unjustly deprived of the full value of the good will and public
`
`image associated with Plaintiffs’ name, marks, and image.
`
`42.
`
`The wrongful acts of Defendants, as alleged herein, unless restrained and
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`10
`
`

`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14"’FloorCostaMesa,
`
`
`
`California92626
`
`enjoined by order of this Court, Will cause great and irreparable injury to the general
`
`public and to Plaintiffs, their business, reputation and goodwill. Plaintiffs have no
`
`adequate remedy at law for the injuries that have been or will continue to be
`
`sustained in this action.
`
`SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT IN VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA
`
`BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE §§14320, Et Seg. AND
`
`TRADEMARK DILUTION IN VIOLATION OF
`
`CALIFORNIA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE §§14330 Et Seg.
`
`Against Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER, OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`
`and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive
`
`43.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege each and every factual allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1
`
`through 42, inclusive, and incorporates them by reference herein.
`
`44. Defendants have infringed, are infringing, diluted, and are diluting,
`
`the
`
`Plaintiffs’ trademark by virtue of their use of a substantially, and confusingly,
`
`similar mark in connection with their goods and services in the State of California.
`
`Defendants’ acts have lessened the capacity of the Plaintiffs’ famous mark to
`
`identify and distinguish the goods and services of the Plaintiffs. Defendants’
`
`infringement has diluted the unique association that has heretofore existed in the
`
`State of California between the Plaintiffs’ marks and their quality goods and
`
`services.
`
`45.
`
`The Wrongful conduct of Defendants constitutes trademark infringement in
`
`violation of California Business and Professions Code §l432G and trademark
`
`©\DOO‘-.]O\'.J1-R-La-Jl\3|'-'“‘
`
`n—-
`
`'_..| 3::
`
`r--A N!
`
`r--L La.)
`
`r—A J3
`
`>— U‘:
`
`r—t ON
`
`r---—~ ‘-J
`
`>-I O0
`
`L-d V0
`
`[0 G
`
`l\) >-t
`
`[Q[Q
`
`R) U.)
`
`dilution in violation of California Business and Professions Code §l4330.
`
`[0—l>-
`
`Defendants committed the aforementioned acts willfully and with the intent to trade
`
`[\J U1
`
`on the reputation of the Plaintiffs and to cause dilution of the Plaintiffs’ famous
`
`[0Q
`
`E0-J
`
`IO 00
`
`trademarks.
`
`46. As a direct and legal result of Defendants’ unauthorized use of the ROCK
`
`REBEL mark, or marks confusingly similar hereto, Defendants have damaged and
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`ll
`
`........M.
`
`

`
`i l
`
`5'-
`
`i i
`
`
`
`
`
`"E5
`
`E i
`
`; E i
`
`will continue to damage Plaintiffs’ goodwill and reputation and have caused, and are
`
`likely to continue to cause, a loss of profits for Plaintiffs. Defendants’ actions have
`
`caused, and will continue to cause, irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and to the public,
`
`who is confused by Defendants’ unauthorized use of the ROCK REBEL mark, or
`
`marks confusingly similar thereto, unless restrained and enjoined by this Court.
`
`Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to prevent Defendants from continuing
`
`their infringing actions and from injuring Plaintiffs.
`
`47.
`
`As a further direct and legal result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have
`
`been damaged and will continue to sustain damage and are entitled to receive
`
`compensation arising from their lost profits and efforts necessary to minimize and/or
`
`prevent customer and consumer confusion, in an amount to be proven at the time of
`
`trial.
`
`In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to disgorge Defendants’ profits, and are
`
`entitled to interest and to their attorney’s fees and costs in bringing this action, all in
`
`an amount to be proven at the time of trial. Plaintiffs are further entitled to
`
`injunctive relief as set forth above, and to all other and further forms of relief this
`
`Court deems appropriate.
`
`48.
`
`The wrongful acts of Defendants, as alleged herein, unless restrained and
`
`enjoined by order of this Court, will cause great and irreparable injury to the general
`
`public and to Plaintiffs, its business, reputation and goodwill. Plaintiffs have no
`
`adequate remedy at
`
`law for the injuries that have been or will continue to be
`
`sustained in this action.
`
`SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ANTI-PHISHING ACT
`
`CAL. BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE SECTIONS §§22948, ET SE! 2.
`
`Against Defendants JOHN N. OLANDER, OLANDER ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`
`and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive
`
`49.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege each and every factual allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1
`
`through 48, inclusive, and incorporate them by reference herein.
`
`50.
`
`The conduct of Defendants as alleged herein constitutes an unlawful use of
`
`3\OOO-JCMKJI-¥hUJl\.)J--*
`
`)1;
`
`)-.J
`
`r— l\)
`
`r-A U.)
`
`>----- J3
`
`M LII
`
`>—*F'-‘-.JON
`
`v—t 00
`
`>— ‘O
`
`l\> C
`
`I9 2-:
`
`IO[0
`
`l\JDJ
`
`l\)-I-\--
`
`[Q U‘:
`
`[\J O\
`
`l\.) ‘-4
`
`bx.) 00
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14"’Floor
`
`
`
`
`
`CostaMesa,California92626
`
`

`
`
`
`GoodmanLawGroup,PC695TownCenterDrive,14’FloorCostaMesa,
`
`
`California92626
`
`in.‘
`
`the Internet, Via Defendants’ website Www.rockrebelshop.co1n to solicit, request, or
`
`;\OO0--JONUI-l>UJl\J
`
`take any action to induce another person to provide identifying information by
`
`representing themselves to be Plaintiffs’ business without the authority or approval
`
`of Plaintiffs, pursuant
`
`to California’s Anti—Phishing Act, Calif. Business and
`
`Professions Code §§ 22948 et seq., as well as the common law of the State of
`
`California.
`
`51.
`
`Plaintiffs are entitled to statutory damages pursuant to Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code
`
`§ 22948.2(1) in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Doliars ($500,000.00) per
`
`Violation in addition to injunctive relief, statutory damages pursuant to Cal. Bus.
`
`Prof. Code § 22948.2(2) in the amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) per
`
`p—A
`
`|._a
`
`Violation, costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.
`
`52.
`
`The wrongful acts of Defendants, as alleged herein, unless restrained and
`
`enjoined by order of this Court, will cause great and irreparable injury to the general
`
`public and to Plaintiffs, their business, reputation and goodwill. Plaintiffs have no
`
`adequate remedy at law for the injuries that have been or will continue to be
`
`sustained in this action.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Court enter judgment in its favor and
`
`against Defendants, and each of them, as follows:
`
`ON THE FIRST AND SECOND CAUSES OF ACTION
`
`AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`
`l.
`
`That Plaintiffs’ ROCK REBEL mark has been infringed by Defendants’ acts
`
`under 15 U.S.C. § 1125;
`
`2.
`
`That Plaintiffs are entitled to recover damages
`
`from Defendants
`
`for
`
`Defendants’ acts of federal
`
`trademark infringement, dilution and unfair
`
`competition, and that these damages be trebled under 15 U.S.C. § lll7(b)
`
`because Defendants’ acts have been willful, and that Plaintiffs be awarded
`
`their reasonable attorneys’ fees;
`
`r-A EN)
`
`»------L U.)
`
`run -1}-
`
`>--4 U1
`
`1-‘ C\
`
`r—t --1
`
`>--A O0
`
`n