Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA862345
`
`Filing date:
`
`12/04/2017
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91237481
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Defendant
`Frank Spirits LLC
`
`JOHN ALUMIT
`ALUMIT IP
`135 S JACKSON STREET, SUITE 200
`GLENDALE, CA 91205
`UNITED STATES
`Email: john@alumitip.com
`
`Response to Board Order/Inquiry
`
`John Alumit
`
`john@alumitip.com
`
`/john alumit/
`
`12/04/2017
`
`Attachments
`
`Frank - civil proceedings.pdf(1409793 bytes )
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 13
`
`
`
`
`DANIEL A. REIDY (SBN 139321)
`LUISA M. BONACHEA (SBN 267664)
`REIDY LAW GROUP
`dan@reidylawgroup.com
`luisa@reidylawgroup.com
`1230 Spring Street
`St. Helena, CA 94574
`Telephone: (707) 963-3030
`Fax: (707) 963-3130
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Frank Family Vineyards, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
` CASE NO. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`FRANK FAMILY VINEYARDS, a
`California limited liability company,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`FRANK SPIRITS, LLC, a Texas limited liability
`company; and DOES 1 through 10,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1. Federal Trademark Infringement
`2. Federal Unfair Competition
`3. California Unfair Competition
`4. Common Law Trademark Infringement
`5. Common Law Unfair Competition
`6. Declaratory Relief
`
`
` DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Plaintiff Frank Family Vineyards, LLC for its Complaint against Defendant Frank Spirits, LLC
`
`and DOES 1 THROUGH 10, alleges as follows:
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`This is an action to redress violations of federal trademark and unfair competition laws
`
`25
`
`(15 U.S.C. § 1114 et seq., and § 1125 et seq.), California’s unfair competition law (Cal. Bus. & Prof.
`
`Code § 17200 et seq.) and common law trademark infringement and unfair competition as a result of
`
`Defendant’s willful and unauthorized use of a trademark in connection with the sale of alcoholic
`
`beverages that is confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s trademark, and as more fully set forth herein.
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 2 of 13
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief restraining Defendant’s infringement of Plaintiff’s trademarks,
`
`monetary damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, declaratory relief and such other relief as shall be
`
`deemed just and proper by the Court.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Frank Family Vineyards, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Frank Family”) is a limited
`
`liability company organized and existing under the laws of California, with an office at 1091 Larkmead
`
`Lane, Calistoga, California 94515. Frank Family owns and operates a winery located in Napa Valley
`
`that has been producing and selling wine throughout the United States since 2001, including wine
`
`under the federally-registered trademark FRANK FAMILY VINEYARDS.
`
`3.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant Frank Spirits, LLC (“Defendant” or “Frank
`
`Spirits”) is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of Texas, with addresses
`
`at 206 E. 9th Street, Suite 1300, Austin, Texas 78701 and in Scottsdale, Arizona. On information and
`
`belief, Frank Spirits was created for the purpose of producing, marketing and distributing alcoholic
`
`beverages, including a vodka, under the trademarks FRANK SPIRITS and FRANK (the “FRANK
`
`SPIRITS Marks”).
`
`4.
`
`The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise, of
`
`Defendants DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`Defendants by such fictitious names (collectively with Defendant Frank Spirits referred to as
`
`19
`
`“Defendants”). Plaintiff will seek leave of the Court to amend this Complaint when the names and
`
`20
`
`capacities of said Defendants have been ascertained.
`
`21
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on such information and belief alleges, that at all
`
`22
`
`times herein mentioned Defendants DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, were the agents, employees,
`
`23
`
`servants, consultants, principals, employers or masters of each of their Co-Defendants and each
`
`Defendant has ratified, adopted or approved the acts or omissions hereinafter set forth of the remaining
`
`Defendants, and each and every Defendant. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and on such
`
`information and belief alleges, that each of these fictitiously named Defendants is responsible in some
`
`manner for acts and/or omissions herein alleged.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 3 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`6.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 1121 and 28 U.S.C. §
`
`1338(a), in that this case arises under the Lanham Act and trademark laws of the United States. The
`
`Court has pendant jurisdiction over the related unfair competition claims under 28 U.S.C. §1338(b).
`
`7.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants and venue is proper in this Judicial
`
`District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § l391(b) because, inter alia, (a) Defendant and/or its agents are doing
`
`business in this District; (b) events giving rise to the claims alleged herein occurred or will occur in
`
`interstate commerce, in the State of California, and in this District, as a result of Defendant’s violations
`
`of the asserted trademarks as alleged below; and (c) Defendant and/or its agents have purposefully
`
`availed themselves of the opportunity to conduct commercial activities in this forum.
`
`8.
`
`Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-2(c), this is an intellectual property matter that is to be
`
`assigned on a district-wide basis.
`
`FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
`
`9.
`
`Since 2001, and long prior to the acts of Defendant complained of herein, Plaintiff has
`
`consistently marketed, promoted, and sold wines under
`
`the
`
`trademark FRANK FAMILY
`
`VINEYARDS (the “FRANK FAMILY Mark”).
`
`10.
`
`Plaintiff owns a valid federal trademark registration, U.S. Registration No. 4346342, for
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`the mark FRANK FAMILY VINEYARDS in International Class 033 for “Wines.” The application
`
`19
`
`was filed on October 1, 2012 and registered on June 4, 2013 with a first use in commerce of May 2001.
`
`20
`
`Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of U.S. Registration No. 4346342.
`
`21
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiff also owns a valid federal trademark registration, U.S. Registration No.
`
`22
`
`4821534, for a design mark prominently featuring the FRANK FAMILY mark in International Class
`
`23
`
`033 for “Wines.” The application was filed on January 28, 2015 and registered on September 29, 2015
`
`with a first use in commerce of May 1, 2001 (collectively, this registration with the above-referenced
`
`registration will hereinafter be referred to as the “FRANK FAMILY Registrations”). Attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of U.S. Registration No. 4821534. The design mark
`
`registration contains the wording FRANK FAMILY in stylized font with the wording VINEYARDS
`
`written below in smaller, stylized font. See Ex. 2.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 4 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`12.
`
`The FRANK FAMILY Registrations are valid, subsisting, and conclusive evidence of
`
`the validity of the marks, Plaintiff’s ownership of the marks, and Plaintiff’s exclusive right to use the
`
`marks in commerce on or in connection with the goods and services specified therein.
`
`13.
`
`Since 2001, Plaintiff has sold millions of bottles of wine bearing the FRANK FAMILY
`
`Mark and is well-known throughout the country for the FRANK FAMILY Mark for alcoholic
`
`beverages. Plaintiff’s FRANK FAMILY-branded wine products have received widespread recognition
`
`in national trade and consumer publications, including Wine & Spirits, Wine Enthusiast, Wine
`
`Spectator, The New York Times, The Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, Travel+Leisure, and others.
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff has invested a substantial amount of time, effort and money in promoting and
`
`producing the FRANK FAMILY Mark and ensuring the high quality of goods provided under the
`
`FRANK FAMILY Mark. As a result of Plaintiff’s investment of substantial financial resources,
`
`extensive marketing efforts and widespread sales for over sixteen years throughout the United States,
`
`the FRANK FAMILY Mark has acquired significant goodwill. The FRANK FAMILY Mark is widely-
`
`recognized and respected by consumers through the United States, as well as by members of the trade,
`
`as an exclusive designation of source for the goods of Plaintiff. As a result of the widespread and
`
`continuous distribution, promotion and sale of alcoholic beverages under the FRANK FAMILY Mark,
`
`the FRANK FAMILY Mark has acquired distinctiveness among consumers of alcoholic beverages.
`
`15.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant’s CEO Philip Risk and CFO Kent Croutcher
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`launched Frank Spirits on or around January 2017.
`
`20
`
`16.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants registered the domain www.frankvodka.com on
`
`21
`
`January 3, 2017 with the domain registrar GoDaddy. In addition to maintaining a website, Defendants
`
`22
`
`maintain a presence on major social networking sites such as Facebook and Instagram to market and
`
`23
`
`promote their infringing alcoholic beverage products.
`
`17.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants formed a limited liability company for Frank
`
`Spirits, LLC that was registered with the Texas Secretary of State on February 6, 2017 for the purpose
`
`of producing, distributing and selling alcoholic beverage products.
`
`18.
`
`On February 21, 2017, Frank Spirits filed a trademark application with the United
`
`States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), Application Serial No. 86637690 (the “Frank
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 5 of 13
`
`
`
`
`Spirits Application”), based on an intent-to-use the mark in commerce under Section 1(b) of the
`
`Trademark Act for the design mark “
`
`” for “spirits, namely, vodka made substantially
`
`from organic ingredients” in International Class 033, the same class of goods as Plaintiff. The Frank
`
`Spirits Application was published for opposition on July 18, 2017.
`
`19.
`
`Frank Spirits also filed trademark applications with the USPTO for the mark “WE
`
`LIKE REAL.” (Application Serial No. 87568583) on August 14, 2017 for “distilled spirits” in
`
`International Class 033 and for the mark “BE IN GOOD SPIRITS.” (Application Serial No. 87419583)
`
`on April 21, 2017 for “spirits” in International Class 033.
`
`20.
`
`On information and belief, Frank Spirits conducted a tasting on or around May 30, 2017
`
`to market and promote alcoholic beverages bearing the FRANK SPIRITS Marks.
`
`21.
`
`In August 2017, Plaintiff became aware that Frank Spirits was using the FRANK
`
`SPIRITS Marks and sent correspondence to Frank Spirits requesting that it cease use of the mark
`
`FRANK in connection with alcoholic beverages and withdraw the Frank Spirits Application.
`
`22.
`
`Defendant thereafter refused to withdraw the Frank Spirits Application or cease use of
`
`the FRANK SPIRITS Marks.
`
`23.
`
`On or around September 21, 2017, Defendants, by and through counsel, submitted
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`product images and labels bearing the FRANK SPIRITS Marks to Plaintiff’s counsel. Thereafter, on
`
`19
`
`October 26, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Opposition to the Frank Spirits Application with the
`
`20
`
`Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (Opposition No. 91237481) to prevent registration of the Frank
`
`21
`
`Spirits Application and now files this action to bar use of the FRANK SPIRITS Marks.
`
`22
`
`24.
`
`Defendant’s adoption and/or use of the FRANK SPIRITS Marks for alcoholic
`
`23
`
`beverages, including vodka, is subsequent to Plaintiff’s adoption, use and registration of its FRANK
`
`FAMILY Mark for alcoholic beverages.
`
`25.
`
`Defendant and Plaintiff are in the same industry, specifically alcoholic beverages, and
`
`offer for sale nearly identical and highly related products to the same target customers, namely
`
`alcoholic beverage consumers.
`
`26.
`
`Vodka and wine are goods purchased by the same group of consumers and likely to
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 6 of 13
`
`
`
`
`emanate from a single source. See, e.g., In re Chatam Int’l, 71 USPQ2d 1944, 1947-48 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2004) (“the goods [tequila and beer] often emanate from the same source because both are alcoholic
`
`beverages that are marketed in many of the same channels of trade to many of the same consumers.”)
`
`(quotations omitted).
`
`27.
`
`The dominant part of both marks that consumers will identify and remember as the
`
`source of the goods is FRANK and Defendants’ use of “spirits” or “organic vodka” is merely
`
`descriptive of the goods.
`
`28.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant and Plaintiff advertise, distribute, and/or sell their
`
`alcohol beverage products in the same trade channels, including the same retail store locations.
`
`29.
`
`Defendant’s use of the FRANK SPIRITS Marks to promote and advertise alcoholic
`
`beverages, including vodka, is likely to cause confusion, mistake or to deceive as to source,
`
`sponsorship, and/or affiliation in relation to Plaintiff’s FRANK FAMILY Mark, and create a false
`
`association that the two marks are affiliated or derive from the same source.
`
`30.
`
`Defendant’s trade name and product name are confusingly similar to the long-standing
`
`FRANK FAMILY Mark and the harm arising from this similarity is exacerbated by the relatedness of
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s goods, both of which are alcoholic beverages.
`
`31.
`
`Defendant’s use of the FRANK SPIRITS Marks for alcoholic beverages is likely to
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`create the erroneous impression that Defendant’s goods originate from or are associated with Plaintiff,
`
`19
`
`that Plaintiff is responsible for Defendant’s goods or that Defendant’s use is endorsed by or is in some
`
`20
`
`way connected to Plaintiff, all to Plaintiff’s injury and harm. Plaintiff will be harmed by such
`
`21
`
`confusion as Defendants’ brand will unjustly benefit from the false association with Plaintiff’s mark.
`
`22
`
`32.
`
`Defendant’s use of the FRANK SPIRITS Marks to promote and advertise alcoholic
`
`23
`
`beverages, including vodka, harms Plaintiff’s goodwill and dilutes Plaintiff’s trademarks.
`
`33.
`
`Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant will continue to
`
`use the FRANK SPIRITS Marks in a false or deceptive manner to promote its goods unless enjoined
`
`from such use. Unless restrained and enjoined, Defendant will continue to engage in the acts
`
`complained of herein and expand its use of the FRANK SPIRITS Marks, causing irreparable damage
`
`to Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s remedy at law is not adequate to compensate Plaintiff for all the injuries
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 7 of 13
`
`
`
`
`resulting from Defendant’s actions.
`
`34.
`
`Defendant is well aware of Plaintiff’s trademark rights in the FRANK FAMILY Mark.
`
`Further, by virtue of Plaintiff’s federal trademark registration, Defendant had constructive knowledge
`
`of Plaintiff’s registered FRANK FAMILY Mark and senior rights in the mark. As a result, Defendant
`
`committed its acts of infringement with full knowledge of Plaintiff’s rights in the FRANK FAMILY
`
`Mark. Defendant acted willfully, deliberately, and has maliciously engaged in the described acts with
`
`intent to injure Plaintiff and to deceive the public. At a minimum, Defendant has acted with
`
`knowledge and reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s registered trademarks.
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`FEDERAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
`
`(15 U.S.C. § 1114 et. seq.)
`
`35.
`
`Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 34
`
`inclusive, and incorporates the said allegations as though fully set forth herein.
`
`36.
`
`As set forth above, Plaintiff owns the FRANK FAMILY Registrations. Plaintiff has
`
`used its registered FRANK FAMILY Mark continuously in commerce for alcoholic beverages and said
`
`marks identify and distinguish Plaintiff’s goods.
`
`37.
`
`Defendant’s activities as alleged herein are without Plaintiff’s permission or authority.
`
`38.
`
`Defendant’s activities as alleged herein are in violation of the Lanham Act, including,
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`but not limited to, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(a) in that Defendant is using its confusingly similar FRANK
`
`20
`
`SPIRITS Marks to advertise and promote its alcoholic beverages products by creating a false
`
`21
`
`association between its goods and Plaintiff’s goods.
`
`22
`
`39.
`
`Defendant’s use of the FRANK SPIRITS Marks for alcoholic beverages causes actual
`
`23
`
`confusion and is likely to cause further confusion and mistake as to the source of the product and/or
`
`sponsorship, ownership, or affiliation of Plaintiff’s products.
`
`40.
`
`On information and belief, and thereon alleged, Defendant has developed, advertised,
`
`marketed and/or distributed its infringing products with knowledge of Plaintiff’s FRANK FAMILY
`
`Mark and with willful and calculated purposes of (a) misleading, deceiving or confusing customers and
`
`the public as to the origin of the infringing products and (b) trading upon Plaintiff’s business reputation
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 8 of 13
`
`
`
`
`and goodwill. This is an exceptional case under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
`
`41.
`
`As a result of its wrongful conduct, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for trademark
`
`infringement. Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, losses including, but not limited to,
`
`damage to its business reputation and goodwill.
`
`42.
`
`Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages, which include its losses and all profits
`
`Defendant has made as a result of its wrongful conduct, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(b).
`
`43.
`
`Plaintiff is also entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a), as it has no
`
`adequate remedy at law as Defendant continues to develop, advertise and/or sell its products to the
`
`same or similar consumers as Plaintiff as well as through the same channels, including the Internet and
`
`distributors. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief as its business reputation and goodwill will be
`
`irreparably harmed if Defendant’s wrongful activities continue and consumers and/or potential
`
`consumers and the public are confused and/or are likely to become further confused, mistaken or
`
`deceived as to the source, origin or authenticity of the infringing materials.
`
`44.
`
`Plaintiff is entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs of suit pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117.
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION
`
`(15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(a) et seq.)
`
`45.
`
`Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 44
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`inclusive, and incorporates the said allegations as though fully set forth herein.
`
`20
`
`46.
`
`Plaintiff is informed and believes, and alleges, that Defendant’s use of the FRANK
`
`21
`
`SPIRITS Marks for alcoholic beverages, including vodka, has resulted in customer confusion or is
`
`22
`
`likely to result in confusion and that Defendant has engaged in such wrongful conduct with the willful
`
`23
`
`purpose of misleading, deceiving, or confusing customers and the public as to the origin and
`
`authenticity of the products offered, marketed, distributed, and/or sold by them by wrongful
`
`association with Plaintiff’s FRANK FAMILY Mark and trade names and this conduct by Defendant is
`
`trading upon Plaintiff’s business reputation and goodwill.
`
`47.
`
`Defendant’s conduct constitutes false or misleading representation that FRANK vodka
`
`products originate from, or are sponsored, endorsed, approved, associated, or are authorized by
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 9 of 13
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, all in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
`
`48.
`
`Defendant’s wrongful conduct is likely to continue unless restrained and enjoined.
`
`49.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s wrongful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to
`
`suffer losses, including, but not limited to, sales revenues illegally and unfairly captured by Defendant
`
`and damage to Plaintiff’s business reputation and goodwill.
`
`50.
`
`Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief enjoining Defendant’s wrongful conduct pursuant
`
`to 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) and to an order impounding all products or materials bearing imitation marks
`
`being used, offered, advertised, distributed and/or sold by Defendant.
`
`THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`CALIFORNIA UNFAIR COMPETITION
`
`(California Business & Professions Code §§ 17200 et. seq.)
`
`51.
`
`Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 50,
`
`inclusive, and incorporates the said allegations as though fully set forth herein.
`
`52.
`
`Defendant’s conduct as alleged above constitutes unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent
`
`business practices in violation of California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq., in that
`
`Defendant’s conduct constitutes trademark infringement and deliberate unfair competition in wanton
`
`disregard of Plaintiff’s valuable intellectual property rights.
`
`53.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant has profited from its infringing acts and acts of
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`unlawful and unfair competition.
`
`20
`
`54.
`
`As a direct and proximate result of the unfair and illegal conduct and representations to
`
`21
`
`consumers and the public by Defendant as herein alleged, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount not
`
`22
`
`yet ascertained, and continues to be damaged. These wrongful acts have proximately caused and/or
`
`23
`
`will continue to cause Plaintiff substantial injury, including confusion in the marketplace, wrongful
`
`association, dilution of its goodwill, confusion of trade partners and potential customers, injury to its
`
`reputation, and diminution in value of its trademarks, trade dress, and trade name. These actions are
`
`causing imminent irreparable harm and injury to Plaintiff.
`
`55.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s wrongful conduct, Plaintiff is entitled to recover from
`
`Defendant the gains, profits, and advantages Defendant has obtained as a result of its wrongful acts as
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 10 of 13
`
`
`
`
`herein alleged and said amounts should be disgorged and restitution made to Plaintiff.
`
`FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
`
`56.
`
`Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 55,
`
`inclusive, and incorporates the said allegations as though fully set forth herein.
`
`57.
`
`The general consuming public of California widely recognizes the FRANK FAMILY
`
`Mark as designating Frank Family as the source of alcoholic beverage products. Frank Family has
`
`common law trademark rights in the FRANK FAMILY Mark under California law.
`
`58.
`
`Defendant’s activities as alleged herein violate Plaintiff’s exclusive and prior trademark
`
`rights under common law.
`
`59.
`
`As a direct result of Defendant’s willful and deliberate actions, Plaintiff has been
`
`damaged by Defendant’s wrongful acts and Defendant has been unjustly enriched.
`
`FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`COMMON LAW UNFAIR COMPETITION
`
`60.
`
`Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 59,
`
`inclusive, and incorporates the said allegations as though fully set forth herein.
`
`61.
`
`Defendant’s activities as alleged herein constitute unfair competition under the common
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`law of the State of California.
`
`19
`
`62.
`
`As a direct result of Defendant’s willful and deliberate actions, Plaintiff has been
`
`20
`
`damaged by Defendant’s wrongful acts and Defendant has been unjustly enriched.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`SIXTH CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF
`
`63.
`
`Plaintiff re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 62,
`
`23
`
`inclusive, and incorporates the said allegations as though fully set forth herein.
`
`64.
`
`Plaintiff seeks a declaration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 that Defendant’s use of the
`
`mark FRANK in connection with alcoholic beverages violates its trademark rights to the FRANK
`
`FAMILY Mark for alcoholic beverages.
`
`65.
`
`An actual and justifiable controversy exists between the parties with respect to Frank
`
`Spirits’ right to use the FRANK SPIRITS Marks for alcoholic beverages.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 11 of 13
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment as follows:
`
`1. That the Court enter a judgment against Defendants, finding that Defendants have:
`
`a. Willfully infringed Plaintiff’s rights in its federally registered trademarks;
`
`b. Willfully infringed Plaintiff’s rights in common law trademarks;
`
`c. Committed and are committing unfair competition; and
`
`d. Otherwise injured the business reputation, goodwill and business of Plaintiff and
`
`irreparably harmed Plaintiff by the acts and conduct set forth in this Complaint.
`
`2. That this Court issue temporary and permanent injunctive relief against Defendants, and
`
`each of them, and that Defendants, their agents, representatives, successors and assigns and
`
`all other in active concert or participation with Defendants, be enjoined and restrained from:
`
`a. Using the FRANK mark for vodka or any mark that imitates or is likely to cause
`
`confusion with Plaintiff’s FRANK FAMILY Mark or engaging in any other
`
`infringing use of Plaintiff’s trademarks;
`
`b. Using any false or misleading representation or name that can or is likely to lead the
`
`industry or public erroneously to believe that any product has been manufactured,
`
`produced, distributed, offered for sale or distribution, sold, promoted, displayed,
`
`sponsored, approved or authorized by or for Plaintiff, when such is not true in fact;
`
`c. Assisting, aiding or abetting any other person or business entity in engaging in or
`
`performing any of the activities referred to in subparagraphs above.
`
`3. That the Court enter an order requiring that Defendant expressly abandon Application
`
`Serial No. 86637690 pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 2.68.
`
`4. That Defendants and all of those in privity with or acting under their direction and/or
`
`control, be required to deliver for destruction all advertising, promotional materials, labels,
`
`caps, packaging, and any other materials bearing the infringing marks together with all
`
`artwork and other means and materials for making and reproducing the same.
`
`5. That the Court enter an order declaring that the Defendants hold in trust, as constructive
`
`trustee for the benefit of Plaintiff, all profits received by Defendant from its distribution or
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 12 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`sale of infringing products and materials.
`
`6. That the Court enter an order requiring Defendant to provide Plaintiff a full and complete
`
`accounting of all profits received by Defendant from its distribution or sale of infringing
`
`products and any other amounts owing to Plaintiff as a result of Defendant’s illegal acts.
`
`7. That the Court order Defendant to pay Plaintiff’s general, special, actual and statutory
`
`damages, including Defendant’s profits, for Defendant’s willful infringement of Plaintiff’s
`
`trademarks. The exact amount of damages is not yet known.
`
`8. That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct.
`
`9. That the Court order Defendant to pay Plaintiff the costs of this action and the reasonable
`
`attorneys’ fees incurred by Plaintiff in prosecuting this action.
`
`10. That the Court grant Plaintiff any other remedy to which it may be entitled as provided for
`
`in 15 U.S.C. §§ 1116 and 1117 or under state law; and,
`
`11. That the Court grant to Plaintiff such other and additional relief as may be just and proper.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`REIDY LAW GROUP
`
`November 8, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: _________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Daniel A. Reidy
`Luisa M. Bonachea
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`1230 Spring Street
`St. Helena, CA 94574
`
`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
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 13 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Seventh Amendment to
`
`the United States Constitution, Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues triable in the above
`
`action.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`REIDY LAW GROUP
`
`November 8, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: _________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Daniel A. Reidy
`Luisa M. Bonachea
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`1230 Spring Street
`St. Helena, CA 94574
`
`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
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-06505
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 4
`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 2 of 4
`Case 3:17-cv-O6505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 2 of 4
`
`“my étatw of gum.
`mutter: étatea' iBatent anti flirahemark @ffine
`
`It}?
`
`Frank Family Vineyards
`
`FRANK FAMILY VINEYARDS. LLC (CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY)
`Reg. No, 4,346,342
`1091 LA RKMEAD LANE
`_
`Registered June 4, 2013 CALISTOGA, CA 94515
`
`Int. CL: 33
`
`FOR: WINES, IN CLASS 33 (US. CLS. 47 AND 49).
`
`TRADEIVIARK
`
`FIRST USE 5-1-2001; IN COMMERCE 5-1-2001.
`
`THE MARK CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY PAR-
`
`PRINCIPAL REGISTER
`
`TICULAR FONT. STYLE, SIZE, OR COLOR.
`
`NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "VINEYARDS", APART FROM
`THE MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`
`
`SEC. 2(F).
`
`SER. NO. SSS—743.154, FILED 10—1—2012.
`
`CHRISTINA SOBRAL, EXAMINING ATTORNEY
`
`
`
`%%fi , ‘2
`
`Artiug Dilerlor ul‘llw Unilull Stale; Patent Mlll‘ TnuJL-nmlk OlTIL'e
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 3 of 4
`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 3 of 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-06505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 4 of 4
`Case 3:17-cv-O6505 Document 1-1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 4 of 4
`
`
`
`FR A NK FA M [LY
`VINEYARDS
`
`FRANK FAMILY VINEYARDS, LLC (CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY)
`Reg. No, 4,82 1 ,534
`1091 LARKMEAD LANE
`.
`Reglstered Sep. 29, 2015 CALISTOGA, CA 94515
`
`FOR: WINES, IN CLASS 33 (US. CLS. 47 AND 49).
`
`Int. CL: 33
`
`
`FIRST USE 5—1—2001; IN COMMERCE 5—1—2001.
`
`
`OWNER OF U.S. REG. NO. 4,346,342.
`
`
`
`NO CLAIM IS MAD 4 IO TH 4 EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE ”FAMILY VINEYARDS”,APART
`FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`THE MARK CONSISTS OF A GRAPHIC IMAGE OF A HISTORIC TWO-STORY STON
`LU
`
`BUILDING FEATURING A ILLEGIBLE INSCRIPTION, SURROUNDED BY TREES AND
`G