Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA608585
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`06/06/2014
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`91215761
`Defendant
`Compass North Industries, LLC
`KENNETH C BOOTH
`BOOTH UDALL FULLER PLC
`1255 W RIO SALADO PKWY STE 215
`TEMPE, AZ 85281-2893
`UNITED STATES
`trademark@boothudall.com
`Motion to Suspend for Civil Action
`Kenneth C. Booth
`cmartin@boothudall.com
`/Kenneth C. Booth/
`06/06/2014
`MotiontoStay002filed.pdf(5974501 bytes )
`CertofService.pdf(7339 bytes )
`
`Proceeding
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`Attachments
`
`

`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`In the matter of Trademark Application No.: 86080009
`For the Mark: BRAVADA
`Date Filed: October 1, 2013
`
`Dave Taylor; and
`Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc.
`
`Opposers,
`
`
`
`Opposition No. 91215761
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`Applicant.
` )
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`Compass North Industries, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MOTION TO STAY OPPOSITION PROCEEDINGS
`
`Compass North, Industries LLC (“Compass North”) hereby respectfully moves
`
`
`
`
`
`pursuant to TBMP §510.02(a) to suspend this present action in favor of the district court
`
`proceeding pending in the District of Arizona (2:14, cv-00034). A stay of the current
`
`proceedings is warranted because the civil action involves issues in common with those
`
`in the current proceeding before the Board. Specifically, the district court litigation will
`
`determine the ownership of the mark “Bravada” and therefore the right to register the
`
`mark, issues currently pending before the Board. A stay of the current proceedings will
`
`also promote judicial economy, save the parties’ time and resources, and prevent
`
`inconsistent outcomes. For the reasons set forth below, Compass North respectfully
`
`requests that the Board stay the current proceeding under TBMP §510.02(a).
`
`On or around October 1, 2013 Compass North filed the current Bravada
`
`trademark application. Shortly after filing, Compass North received a cease and desist
`
`

`
`letter from Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. (“Bravada Yacht Sales”) that indicated that Bravada
`
`Yacht Sales would oppose the registration and file a lawsuit to enjoin the use of the
`
`Bravada mark. See December 13, 2013 letter to Ken Booth, a true and accurate copy
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Compass North thereafter filed a declaratory judgment
`
`action against Bravada Yacht Sales, its officers, and related entities (collectively
`
`“Bravada Yacht Sales”) in the District of Arizona Case No. 2:4-cv-00034 seeking a
`
`declaration that Compass North owned the “Bravada” trademark in connection with
`
`houseboats and yachts. See Complaint at ¶ 166, true and accurate copy attached hereto as
`
`Exhibit 2. Compass North later amended the complaint to add additional claims of
`
`trademark infringement and cybersquatting related to the “Bravada” mark. See Amended
`
`Complaint at ¶¶ 189, 193, 203, and 212, true and accurate copy attached hereto as Exhibit
`
`3. Bravada Yacht Sales answered and asserted counterclaims against Compass North,
`
`including a declaration that the “Bravada” mark is owned by a joint venture. See Answer
`
`to Amended Complaint and Counterclaim at ¶ 55, true and accurate copy attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit 4. On April 4, 2014, Bravada Yacht Sales filed an opposition to the present
`
`registration proceeding. The opposition argues that the registration of the “Bravada”
`
`mark “would be inconsistent with Opposers’ and the Bravada JV’s rights.” Opp. at ¶ 8.
`
`The opposition further explains that the Bravada Yacht Sales challenged the ownership of
`
`the Bravada mark in the U.S. District Court. Opp. at ¶6. The ownership and right to
`
`register the “Bravada” mark is therefore pending before the Board in the present action
`
`and also before the District of Arizona.
`
`“Ordinarily, the Board will suspend proceedings in the case before it if the final
`
`determination of the other proceeding will have a bearing on the issues before the
`
`

`
`Board.” TBMP §510.02(a). Moreover, “[t]o the extent that a civil action in a Federal
`
`district court involves issues in common with those in a proceeding before the Board, the
`
`decision of the Federal district court is binding upon the Board, while the decision of the
`
`Board is not binding upon the court.” Id. In this case, both Compass North and Bravada
`
`Yacht Sales have sought a declaration of ownership of the “Bravada” mark in the District
`
`of Arizona. The opposition filed by Bravada Yacht Sales also seeks a determination of
`
`rights related to the “Bravada” mark. Opp. at ¶ 8. Because the district court will
`
`determine both ownership of the mark and the right to register the mark, the district court
`
`proceeding will have a bearing on issues currently before the Board. Moreover, because
`
`the district court’s decision is binding on the Board, continuation of this proceeding
`
`would also be inefficient, costly, and subject the parties to parallel proceedings that risks
`
`inconsistent determinations. Lastly, there are no pending dispositive motions before the
`
`board such that the stay would serve to prejudice Bravada Yacht Sales or serve to
`
`“escape” a pending motion. Id. §510.02(a), note 10.
`
`For the reasons set forth above, Compass North hereby respectfully requests that
`
`the action be suspended pending the outcome of the district court litigation.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`By: __/Kenneth C. Booth/__________
`
`Kenneth C. Booth
`
`Reg. No. 42,342
`
`
`
`Date: __6/6/2014_____
`
`
`
`
`
`BOOTH UDALL FULLER, PLC
`1255 W. Rio Salado Parkway, Ste. 215
`Tempe, AZ 85281
`480.830.2700
`480.830.2717 fax
`kbooth@BoothUdall.com
`
`

`
`
`
`Exhibit 1
`Exhibit 1
`
`

`
`
`
`3200 N. CENTRALA\I'E.NUE.. WI-I FLOOR, PFIOENIX, AZ 85012
`
`jahurgwilkmm
`
`Renee Gerstman
`
`rbg@jaburgwilk.oon1
`602.248.1049 - Direct Phone
`602.248.0522 - Main Fax
`
`December 13, 2013
`
`Via First Class Mail and email trademark@boan‘mdalL com
`
`Kenneth Booth
`
`Booth Udall _Ful]er PLC '
`1255 W. Rio Salado Pkwy, Suite 215
`Tempe, AZ 85281-2893
`
`Re:
`
`Bravado Yachts
`
`Dear Mr. Booth:
`
`This office represents Dave Taylor and Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. I have personally represented
`Mr. Taylor for more than 15 years and Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. since its inception in July 2010. One
`of the areas of our representation is in connection with the protection ‘of intellectual property rights of
`Mr. Taylor and Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. We have been advised that you represent Jim Goettl and
`Compass North Industries, LLC. Mr. Goettl has requested that all additional communications regarding
`Bravada Yachts or the claimed Bravada trademark be directed to you.
`
`It has also come to our attention that Compass North has attempted to register the mark
`BRAVADA in connection houseboats and yachts with the United States Patent and Trademark Office,
`serial number 860800009. We find it curious that Compass North has filed this registration claiming to
`be the sole owner of the BRAVADA mark when there is substantial documentation that Mr. Goettl and
`Mr. Taylor and their related entities were engaged in a partnership for the sale and manufacture of
`houseboats under the name BRAVADA. The name and mark BRAVADA when used in connection with
`houseboats and yachts is owned by that partnership and not by Compass North individually. If you have
`evidence supporting the contention that Compass Nolth has sole ownership of the BRAVADA mark,
`please send it to me immediately. Because Compass North does not have a complete ownership interest
`in the BRAVADA mark, it cannot register the mark independent of Mr. Taylor or Bravada Yacht Sales,
`Inc.
`.
`.
`'
`-
`
`One purpose of this letter is to advise you that Mr. Taylor and Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. do not
`agree or consent to the registration of the BRAVADA mark by Compass North and that should Compass
`North continue to pursue registration, Mr. Taylor and Bravada Yachts Sales, Inc. will, at the appropriate
`time, file an opposition with the USPTO. Because it does not have any independent legal rights to the
`BRAVADA mark, please withdraw the registration application filed by Compass North with the USPTO
`within five (5) business days from the date of this letter.
`
`It has also come to our attention that Mr. Goettl and Compass North are utilizing the BRAVADA
`mark, as well as materials created and generated by Mr. Taylor and Bravada Yachts Sales, Inc., to
`market and sell houseboats and yachts for their sole benefit. Mr. Taylor has a 50% ownership in the
`BRAVADA mark and is intimately associated with the BRAVADA name and mark as well as the
`
`16379-1 I5379-00000\R.BG\RBG’tl269‘.l59. I
`
`.
`
`

`
`IABURGIWILK
`Attorneys at Law
`Ken Booth
`
`December 13, 2013
`Page 2
`
`design of the boats built and marketed under that name. Mr. Taylor opposes the continued use of the
`BRAVADA name and mark in any way by Mr. Goettl and Compass North, including without limitation
`the advertising of new boats for sale under the name BRAVADA or the continued use of the
`BRAVADA name and mark in any marketing or promotional materials. There has already been
`significant confiision in the marketplace regarding the responsibility and involvement of Mr. Taylor and
`Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. in the new boats being independently marketed and advertised by Compass
`North.
`
`Please acknowledge within five (5) business days of this letter that Mr. Goetrtl and Compass
`North will cease marketing or using the BRAVADA name in any context. If Mr. Goettl and Compass
`North do not cease all such activities and advise us in writing that they are in agreement to do so,
`Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. and Mr. Taylor are prepared to initiate a lawsuit seeking to enjoin the use of
`the BRAVADA name and mark.
`
`Mr. Goettl and Mr. Taylor carmot continue jointly owning the BRAVADA mark. This dispute
`can be resolved without litigation by entering into an agreement whereby Mr. Goettl, Mr. Taylor and all
`related entities agree to forever cease use ofthe BRAVADA mark and name, and Compass North agrees
`to withdraw the pending trademark registration filed with the USPTO.
`
`If we do not hear from you by December 20, 2013, or if you refuse or fail to comply with our
`demand, then we are prepared to: (I) oppose the attempted registration of the BRAVADA mark by
`Compass North; (2) file our own, competing registration of the mark which reflects the correct
`ownership interests; and (3) file a lawsuit to enjoin the use of the BRAVADA name and mark by your
`clients.
`
`Please feel free to contact me with additional questions regarding the ownership interests of the
`BRAVADA mark.
`I am happy to discuss further with you the facts and circumstances demonstrating
`the joint ownership of the BRAVADA mark-
`
`
`
`RBG:lar
`
`cc:
`
`Client
`
`Maria Crimi Speth
`
`16379-16379-00000\RBG\RBG\12697S9.l
`
`

`
`
`
`Exhibit 2
`Exhibit 2
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 1 of 24
`
`80 E. Rio Salado Parkway, Suite 401
`Tempe, AZ 85281
`Telephone: (480) 733-6800
`Fax: (480) 733-3748
`efile.dockets@davismiles.com
`
`Scott F. Gibson - SBN 10884
`Julie A. LaFave - SBN 20353
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
`
`Compass North Industries, LLC, an Arizona
`limited liability company,
`
`CASE NO.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`(Declaratory Relief, Misappropriation of
`Trade Secrets, Breach of Restrictive
`Covenant, Breach of Fiduciary Duty,
`Breach of Duty of Loyalty, Accounting)
`
`vs.
`
`David B. Taylor and Tiffini Taylor, husband
`and wife; Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc., an
`Arizona corporation; Unlimited Boat Sales,
`Inc., an Arizona corporation; Unlimited
`Houseboat Services, Inc., an Arizona
`corporation; Taylor Yachts, Inc., an Arizona
`corporation; Chad Orth and Coleen Orth,
`husband and wife,
`
` Defendants.
`
`Plaintiff Compass North Industries, LLC (“Compass North”) asserts the following
`
`Complaint against Defendants David B. Taylor, Tiffini Taylor, Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc.
`
`and Taylor Yachts, Inc.
`
`1
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 2 of 24
`
`Statement of the Case
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for declaratory judgment under the Federal Declaratory
`
`Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, as well as other relief asserted as alternative
`
`legal theories.
`
`Jurisdiction
`
`2.
`
`The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s federal claim
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338 in that this Complaint raises federal questions
`
`arising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et. seq. The Court has supplemental
`
`jurisdiction over the state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
`
`The Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants inasmuch as
`
`Defendants are residents of the State of Arizona.
`
`Parties
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff Compass North is an Arizona corporation with its principle place of
`
`business located in Maricopa County, Arizona.
`
`6.
`
`Compass North is the manufacturer of Bravada Yachts, the nation’s leading
`
`luxury houseboat.
`
`7.
`
`Defendants David B. Taylor and Tiffini Taylor are husband and wife. All acts
`
`by Defendant David B. Taylor referenced in this Complaint were done on behalf of the
`
`marital community existing between him and Defendant Tiffini Taylor. Defendant Tiffini
`
`Taylor is named to comply with the requirements of Arizona community property law.
`
`8.
`
`Defendant David Taylor is a shareholder in Defendants Bravada Yacht Sales,
`
`Inc., Unlimited Boat Sales, Inc., and Taylor Yachts, Inc.
`
`2
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 3 of 24
`
`9.
`
`Defendant Bravada Yacht Sales, Inc. (“Yacht Sales”) is an Arizona
`
`corporation.
`
`10.
`
`Defendant Unlimited Boat Sales, Inc. (“Unlimited”) is an Arizona
`
`corporation.
`
`11.
`
`Defendant Unlimited Houseboat Services, Inc. (“Unlimited Services”) is an
`
`Arizona corporation.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`Defendant Taylor Yachts, Inc. (“Taylor Yachts”) is an Arizona corporation.
`
`Defendant Taylor is the controlling shareholder of Defendants Yacht Sales,
`
`Unlimited, Unlimited Services, and Taylor Yachts. Defendants Taylor, Yacht Sales,
`
`Unlimited, Unlimited Services, and Taylor Yachts are referred to collectively as the “Taylor
`
`Defendants.”
`
`14.
`
`Defendants Chad Orth and Coleen Orth are husband and wife. All acts by
`
`Defendant Chad Orth referenced in this Complaint were done on behalf of the marital
`
`community existing between him and Defendant Coleen Orth. Coleen Orth is named to
`
`comply with the requirements of Arizona community property law.
`
`15.
`
`Jim and Tracey Goettl are the principals of Compass North. The Goettls are
`
`Wild at Heart II
`
`houseboat enthusiasts.
`
`16.
`
`17.
`
`Jim Goettl also is a designer.
`
`In October 2006, Mr. Goettl designed a houseboat, “Wild at Heart II”. The
`
`houseboat was designed as the personal houseboat for Mr. and Mrs. Goettl.
`
`18. Mr. and Mrs. Goettl became acquainted with Defendant Dave Taylor at the
`
`marina at Lake Powell.
`
`3
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 4 of 24
`
`19.
`
`At this time, Defendant Dave Taylor was selling houseboats at Lake Powell
`
`for Sumerset Houseboats through Unlimited.
`
`20. Mr. Goettl asked Mr. Taylor whether Sumerset would build the “Wild at Heart
`
`II” as a custom project for him.
`
`21. Mr. Taylor arranged for and accompanied Mr. and Mrs. Goettl to meet with
`
`representatives of Sumerset to discuss having Sumerset build the “Wild at Heart II” for
`
`them.
`
`Goettl.
`
`22.
`
`Sumerset built “Wild at Heart II” as a custom built project for Mr. and Mrs.
`
`23. Mr. and Mrs. Goettl launched “Wild at Heart II” at Lake Powell in May 2007.
`
`Popularity of Mr. Goettl’s Design
`
`24.
`
`The design of the “Wild at Heart II” was bold and innovative, incorporating
`
`many design features not previously used in the Lake Powell houseboat market.
`
`25.
`
`Other boaters were thrilled with the innovative design of “Wild at Heart II.”
`
`A number of boaters later purchased boats from Sumerset with the same or similar
`
`variations of the “Wild at Heart II” design elements.
`
`26.
`
`Sumerset recognized the cutting-edge innovativeness of Mr. Goettl’s design,
`
`and began efforts to involve him more in its corporate activities.
`
`27.
`
`28.
`
`Sumerset invited Mr. Goettl to become a member of its Board of Advisors.
`
`In March 2008, Mr. and Mrs. Goettl traveled to Kentucky to attend the
`
`meeting of the Sumerset Board of Advisors and the National Houseboat Expo. Mr. Taylor
`
`also attended the meeting of the Board of Advisors and the National Houseboat Expo.
`
`29. While Mr. and Mrs. Goettl were in Kentucky, Sumerset asked if Mr. Goettl
`
`and Mr. Taylor were interested in developing a private label boat utilizing Mr. Goettl’s
`
`4
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 5 of 24
`
`innovative design ideas. Sumerset would manufacture the private label boat, and Mr.
`
`Taylor would handle sales at Lake Powell.
`
`30. While Mr. and Mrs. Goettl were in Kentucky, Mr. Taylor received a call from
`
`a prospect who wanted to buy a boat based on the design of “Wild at Heart II.”
`
`31. Mr. Goettl sold “Wild at Heart II” to the buyer, and determined that he would
`
`design a private label of houseboats that Sumerset would manufacture and Mr. Taylor
`
`would sell.
`
`Bravada One
`
`32.
`
`After attending the meeting of the Board of Advisors, Mr. and Mrs. Goettl and
`
`Mr. Taylor were brainstorming about what they should call their new private label boat.
`
`They ultimately settled on “Bravada,” a name that Mrs. Goettl suggested.
`
`33.
`
`Initially, the parties intended to form a new company – Bravada Yachts, LLC
`
`– to design and handle national sales for the Bravada Yachts.
`
`34.
`
`The parties initially intended that Bravada Yachts, LLC would be owned
`
`50/50 by Mr. Goettl and Mr. Taylor.
`
`35.
`
`The parties initially intended that Bravada Yachts, LLC would provide
`
`Sumerset with the technical and styling designs for the construction of the private line of
`
`houseboats.
`
`36.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC would also maintain national marketing rights for the
`
`private line of houseboats.
`
`37.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC would establish, train, manage, and support regional
`
`dealers of Bravada Yachts.
`
`The Letter of Understanding
`
`5
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 6 of 24
`
`38.
`
`In April 2008, Mr. Goettl, Mr. Taylor, and Sumerset entered into a Letter of
`
`Understanding regarding the manufacture of Bravada Yachts. Exhibit “A” is a copy of the
`
`Letter of Understanding.
`
`39.
`
`The parties never conducted business pursuant to the terms of the Letter of
`
`Understanding.
`
`40.
`
`The terms of the Letter of Understanding never were completed.
`
`Mr. Taylor refuses to form Bravada Yachts, LLC
`
`41. Mr. Goettl had his attorney draft articles of organization for Bravada Yachts,
`
`LLC.
`
`42. Mr. Taylor refused to sign the articles of organization.
`
`43. Mr. Taylor never made a capital contribution to the formation of Bravada
`
`Yachts, LLC.
`
`44.
`
`45.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC was never formed.
`
`The parties never did business as Bravada Yachts, LLC.
`
`Mr. Goettl Incurs the Cost of
`
`Developing Bravada Yachts
`
`46.
`
`Around April 2008, Mr. Goettl designed the profile and floor plan for the first
`
`Bravada Yachts prototype, which would be known as Bravada One.
`
`47.
`
`Bravada One was a high end, fully custom built boat that would retail for $1.5
`
`million to $1.8 million.
`
`48. Mr. Goettl designed Bravada One.
`
`49. Mr. Goettl worked directly with Sumerset to incorporate the design elements
`
`of Bravada One into the prototype model.
`
`6
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 7 of 24
`
`50. Mr. and Mrs. Goettl incurred all costs of building Bravada One.
`
`51. Mr. Taylor incurred none of the costs of building Bravada One.
`
`52.
`
`In July 2008, Mr. Goettl hired a designer to prepare a logo for Bravada
`
`Yachts.
`
`53. Mr. Goettl paid for the cost of the logo.
`
`54. Mr. Taylor paid nothing for the cost of the logo.
`
`55. Mr. Goettl purchased the domain name www.bravadayachts.com from Go
`
`Daddy.
`
`56. Mr. Goettl paid for the cost of the domain name.
`
`57. Mr. Taylor paid nothing for the domain name.
`
`58. Mr. Goettl designed Bravada One.
`
`59. Mr. Goettl hired a firm to develop a 3-D rendering of Bravada One.
`
`60. Mr. Goettl paid for the cost of the 3-D rendering of Bravada One.
`
`61. Mr. Taylor paid nothing toward the cost of the 3-D rendering of Bravada One.
`
`62.
`
`Around June 2008, Sumerset began working on the prototype houseboat,
`
`Bravada One.
`
`63. Mr. and Mrs. Goettl designed Bravada One as their personal houseboat.
`
`64. Mr. Goettl was in constant communication with Sumerset about construction
`
`of Bravada One.
`
`65. Mr. Goettl made several trips to Kentucky to coordinate construction of
`
`Bravada One.
`
`66. Mr. Goettl alone incurred the cost of the trips to Kentucky.
`
`67.
`
`Around March 2009, Sumerset finished working on the prototype version of
`
`Bravada Yachts, i.e., Bravada One.
`
`7
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 8 of 24
`
`68. Mr. and Mrs. Goettl alone paid for the cost of developing and building
`
`Bravada One.
`
`69. Mr. Taylor paid nothing toward the cost of developing and building Bravada
`
`One.
`
`Sumerset Goes Out of Business
`
`70.
`
`After the economy collapsed in 2008, Sumerset had significant financial
`
`problems that ultimately led to its demise.
`
`71.
`
`Sumerset had difficulty delivering Bravada One to Mr. and Mrs. Goettl at
`
`Lake Powell.
`
`72.
`
`Bravada One did not arrive at Lake Powell until June 2011.
`
`73. Mr. and Mrs. Goettl alone paid the cost of transporting Bravada One to Lake
`
`Powell.
`
`74.
`
`75.
`
`Sumerset closed its doors in the summer of 2009.
`
`Initially, Sumerset intended to close for three months to allow a glut of
`
`finished inventory to clear out during the second half of the year.
`
`76. When it first began having financial problems, Sumerset approached Mr.
`
`Goettl and Mr. Taylor about buying the company.
`
`77. Mr. Goettl and Mr. Taylor explored the possibility of purchasing the
`
`company, but Sumerset’s financial problems were too deep to allow them to do so.
`
`78. Mr. Taylor also attempted to purchase Sumerset using an investor from Utah.
`
`79.
`
`80.
`
`Sumerset sales never picked up and it never reopened for business.
`
`Ultimately, the bank liquidated the assets of Sumerset. Thoroughbred
`
`Houseboats, another manufacturer located in the same area, purchased the Sumerset name
`
`and URL from the bank.
`
`8
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 9 of 24
`
`Failure of the Letter of Understanding
`
`81.
`
`Though it built the prototype boat (Bravada One), Sumerset never built a
`
`private line of boats under the name Bravada Yachts.
`
`82.
`
`Sumerset did not provide product warranty or product liability for the private
`
`line of boats.
`
`83.
`
`Sumerset never entered into any purchase contracts with Bravada Yachts,
`
`LLC.
`
`84.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC never entered into any purchase contracts with retail
`
`purchasers.
`
`85.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC did not develop any intellectual property for the
`
`designs, styles, or design elements of any houseboats.
`
`86.
`
`87.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC held no national marketing rights for the houseboats.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC did not establish, train, manage, or support regional
`
`dealers of Bravada Yachts.
`
`88.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC did not provide marketing materials for Bravada
`
`Yachts.
`
`89.
`
`90.
`
`Yachts.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC did not develop a web site for Bravada Yachts.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC did not provide advertising or promotion for Bravada
`
`91.
`
`Sumerset did not provide a link from its web site to the Bravada Yachts web
`
`site.
`
`92.
`
`93.
`
`Sumerset did not provide cross promotional advertising for Bravada Yachts.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC did not commit to acquire three Bravada 7522 GT boats
`
`from Sumerset.
`
`9
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 10 of 24
`
`94.
`
`Sumerset did not produce tooling and production modifications to
`
`manufacture Bravada Yachts.
`
`95.
`
`Sumerset and Bravada Yachts, LLC did not enter into any agreements
`
`regarding transportation of the Bravada 7522 GT boats from Kentucky to Lake Powell.
`
`96.
`
`Bravada Yachts, LLC did not act as the owner’s representative on order and
`
`manufacturing coordination and customer service related issues.
`
`Compass North Begins Manufacturing Bravada Yachts
`
`97.
`
`Around October 2009, Mr. Goettl and Mr. Taylor had discussions about
`
`forming an alternative business venture in light of Sumerset going out of business and the
`
`subsequent failure of the Letter of Understanding.
`
`98. Mr. Taylor had refused to sign the corporate documents to form Bravada
`
`Yachts, LLC.
`
`99.
`
`The relationship contemplated by the Letter of Understanding no longer was
`
`possible because Sumerset was unable to manufacture the houseboats.
`
`100. Mr. Goettl had incurred all of the expense of designing Bravada One and was
`
`developing the production concept for the Bravada Yachts line.
`
`101. Mr. Goettl had operated Compass North as a custom home builder. He also
`
`had operated a consulting engineering business for 20 years. His expertise in custom
`
`building and in engineering gave him the knowledge and expertise he needed to
`
`manufacture Bravada Yachts.
`
`102. Mr. Goettl moved forward with the design and manufacture of the Bravada
`
`Yachts line of houseboats.
`
`103. Mr. Taylor was willing to sell the Bravada Yachts line of houseboats at Lake
`
`Powell through Unlimited.
`
`10
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 11 of 24
`
`104. Compass North secured a facility where it could manufacture Bravada Yachts.
`
`105. Compass North began acquiring equipment for use in manufacturing Bravada
`
`Yachts.
`
`106.
`
`In January 2010, Compass North began manufacturing Bravada Yachts.
`
`107. Compass North bore all of the cost of manufacturing Bravada Yachts.
`
`108. Compass North assumed all of the risk of manufacturing Bravada Yachts.
`
`109. Compass North designed Bravada Yachts.
`
`110. As the manufacturer, Compass North assumed the costs associated with any
`
`warranty work on Bravada Yachts.
`
`111. Compass North designed and manufactured four different models of Bravada
`
`Yachts: Bravada LT, Bravada GT, Bravada Limited, and Bravada Custom.
`
`112. Compass North exercised day-to-day control over the quality of Bravada
`
`Yachts.
`
`113. Compass North maintained the quality and uniformity of Bravada Yachts.
`
`114. Compass North maintained the web site www.bravadayachts.com.
`
`115. Compass North maintained the Bravada Yachts site on Facebook.
`
`116. Compass North incurred the cost of advertising campaigns for Bravada
`
`Yachts.
`
`117. Compass North is known in the houseboat industry as the manufacturer of
`
`Bravada Yachts.
`
`118. Compass North sold houseboats bearing the Bravada Yachts trademark
`
`directly to consumers and through dealers other than the Taylor Defendants.
`
`119. Compass North displayed information about Bravada Yachts at the national
`
`Houseboat Expo in Lake Cumberland, Kentucky.
`
`11
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 12 of 24
`
`120. Unlimited / Yacht Sales acted as the dealer for Bravada Yachts at Lake
`
`Powell.
`
`121. Unlimited / Yacht Sales had initial contact with customers on retail sales at
`
`Lake Powell.
`
`122. Unlimited / Yacht Sales took a percentage of the sales price (which Unlimited
`
`/ Yacht Sales set) for its profit on each sale at Lake Powell.
`
`123. The profit that Unlimited / Yacht Sales earned was separate and independent
`
`from the cost of designing and manufacturing Bravada Yachts that Compass North bore.
`
`124. Though Unlimited / Yacht Sales acted as the dealer for Bravada Yachts at
`
`Lake Powell, it was not the only source of sales of Bravada Yachts. More than 40 percent
`
`of all Bravada Yacht sales have occurred through means outside of Unlimited or Mr. Taylor.
`
`Mr. Taylor Forms A Competing Company
`
`125. Mr. Taylor formed Taylor Yachts on September 13, 2013.
`
`126. Taylor Yachts has contracted with a competing manufacturer to build
`
`houseboats based on the Bravada Yachts style and design elements.
`
`127. Mr. Taylor has taken leads generated by Bravada Yachts and turned that
`
`business over to Taylor Yachts.
`
`128. Mr. Taylor has hired a Chad Orth, a former employee of Compass North, to
`
`modify Compass North designs and floor plans for his new venture.
`
`129. On information and belief, Mr. Orth is using Compass North designs as a
`
`template for these modified designs.
`
`130. Mr. Orth was contractually obligated to return those designs to Compass
`
`North upon termination of his employment.
`
`12
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 13 of 24
`
`131. Mr. Orth is violating his restrictive covenants with Compass North in
`
`modifying those designs and floor plans.
`
`132. On information and belief, Defendants were aware that Mr. Orth was violating
`
`his restrictive covenants with Compass North.
`
`133. Mr. Taylor has solicited other employees or former employees of Compass
`
`North to work for Taylor Yachts.
`
`134. Mr. Taylor has stopped selling Bravada Yachts and has instead directed
`
`customers to his new venture.
`
`Mr. Taylor’s Unfounded Claim to
`
`An Interest in Bravada Yachts Mark
`
`135. Mr. Goettl and his related entities have used the Bravada Yachts trade name
`
`since August 2008.
`
`136. Compass North holds a state trade mark registration in the name Bravada
`
`Yachts for houseboats.
`
`137. Compass North has filed a federal application for the trade mark Bravada
`
`Yachts for houseboats.
`
`138. Mr. Taylor claims that he has a “50% ownership in the BRAVADA mark.”
`
`139. Mr. Taylor claims that he and Mr. Goettl “and their related entities were
`
`engaged in a partnership for the sale and manufacture of houseboats under the name
`
`BRAVADA.”
`
`140. Mr. Taylor asserts that the “name and mark BRAVADA when used in
`
`connection with houseboats and yachts is owned by that partnership and not by Compass
`
`North individually.”
`
`13
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00034-GMS Document 1 Filed 01/07/14 Page 14 of 24
`
`141. Mr. Taylor has objected to Mr. Goettl and Compass North continuing to use
`
`the Bravada mark, as they have since 2008.
`
`142. Mr. Taylor’s claims of an ownership interest in the Bravada mark are
`
`unfounded.
`
`143. Compass North is entitled to a judicial declaration that it alone has all rights in
`
`and to the trademark Bravada.
`
`Mr. Orth’s Breach of His
`
`Employment Agreement
`
`144. Defendant Chad Orth was employed as a design engineer with Compass
`
`North.
`
`145. On or about September 19, 2011, as part of his employment with Compass
`
`North, Mr. Orth entered into an Acknowledgement of Trade Secrets, Covenant Not to Use,
`
`or Disclose Confidential Information and Trade Secrets, and Anti-Piracy Agreement
`
`(“NDA”). A copy of the NDA is attached as Exhibit “B”.
`
`146. Recital 5 of the NDA reads as follows:
`
`The operations methods and procedures, proprietary marketing
`materials and programs, including but not limited to accounting data,
`pricing strategies, billing information and histories, customer lists
`and information, vendor information lists, miscellaneous computer
`programs and data, and internal proprietary forms, all utilized by
`Compass North Industries, LLC have been painstakingly developed
`or otherwise acquired after considerable time and expense, and in the
`opinion of both Compass North Industries, LLC and Employee
`constitute trade secrets protected by the Law.
`
`147. Recital 7 o