throbber
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA1022566
`
`Filing date:
`
`12/13/2019
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91252765
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Plaintiff
`LiveRamp, Inc.
`
`MEREDITH LOWRY
`WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS LLP
`3333 PINNACLE HILLS PARKWAY SUITE 510
`ROGERS, AR 72758
`UNITED STATES
`mlowry@wlj.com, jdougherty@wlj.com, aturnbaugh@wlj.com
`4796313282
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Motion to Suspend for Civil Action
`
`Meredith Lowry
`
`mlowry@wlj.com, aturnbaugh@wlj.com
`
`/Meredith Lowry/
`
`12/13/2019
`
`Attachments
`
`MotionStay.pdf(2560648 bytes )
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Opposition No. 91252765
`
`Serial No. 88/578,434
`
`) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
`
`
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.,
`
`v.
`
`KOCHAVA INC.,
`
`Opposer,
`
`Applicant.
`
`MOTION FOR SUSPENSION
`
`Opposer LiveRamp, Inc. (“Opposer”) moves for a suspension of the above-styled
`
`opposition proceeding pursuant to Trademark Rule of Practice 2.117(a). See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 2.117(a).
`
`The parties to this proceeding are involved in an active litigation in the U.S. District
`
`Court for the Northern District of California entitled LiveRamp, Inc. v. Kochava Inc., Civil
`
`Action No. (3:19-cv-02158), in which Opposer seeks a judicial determination of whether
`
`Opposer’s use of the mark IDENTITYLINK violates any trademark rights owned by Kochava
`
`Inc. (“Kochava”) and seeks to settle the ownership of the mark IDENTITYLINK. (A copy of
`
`the Opposer’s Complaint (Dkt. 1 in the civil action) is attached as Exhibit 1.) In light of this
`
`pending federal court litigation, the TTAB has already stayed, Opposition No. 91239025, which
`
`is Applicant’s opposition to Opposer’s application to register the IDENTITYLINK mark. (A
`
`copy of the stay order is attached as Exhibit 2).
`
`The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s well-settled policy is to suspend proceedings
`
`when one or both parties are involved in a civil action that may have a bearing on the Board case.
`
`

`

`Trademark Rule 2.117(a); General Motors Corp. v. Cadillac Club Fashions Inc., 22 USPQ2d 1933,
`
`1937 (TTAB 1992). The pending civil action in the Northern District of California involves the
`
`same mark and the same parties as this proceeding and Opposer’s proceeding, Opposition No.
`
`91239025. The outcome of the federal court action may be dispositive of or have a bearing on the
`
`current Opposition proceeding. Accordingly, the Board’s policy calls for suspension of this
`
`proceeding.
`
`Therefore, Opposer respectfully requests that the Board suspend this Opposition
`
`proceeding pending termination of the civil action.
`
`This 13th day of December, 2019.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Meredith K. Lowry/
`Meredith K. Lowry, Reg. No. 58,422
`WRIGHT LINDSEY & JENNINGS LLP
`3333 Pinnacle Hills Pkwy. Ste. 510
`Rogers, AR 72758
`(479) 631-3282
`
`Attorneys for Opposer
`LIVERAMP, INC.
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`This is to certify that, on December 13, 2019, the undersigned has served on this date
`a true and correct copy of the within and foregoing Motion for Suspension regarding
`Opposition No. 91252765, and the exhibits thereto, upon counsel for Applicant by emailing
`the same as follows:
`
`J. Christopher Lynch
`Joshua T. Grandinetti
`Lee & Hayes, PLLC
`601 W. Riverside Avenue, Suite 1400
`Spokane, Washington 99201
`chris@leehayes.com, jgrandinett@leehayes.com
`
`/Meredith K. Lowry/
`Meredith K. Lowry, AR Bar 2005232
`J. Charles Dougherty, AR Bar 96185
`WRIGHT LINDSEY & JENNINGS LLP
`3333 Pinnacle Hills Pkwy. Ste. 510
`Rogers, AR 72758
`(479) 631-3282
`Attorneys for Opposer
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT 1
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 1 of 15
`
`SHELBY PASARELL TSAI, SBN. 220408
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`Professional Corporation
`One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, Suite 3300
`San Francisco, CA 94105-1126
`Telephone: (415) 947-2159
`Facsimile:
`(415) 947-2099
`Email:
`stsai@wsgr.com
`
`TONIA OUELLETTE KLAUSNER, pending
`pro hac vice
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`Professional Corporation
`1301 Avenue of the Americas, 40th Floor
`New York, NY 10019-6022
`Telephone: (212) 999-5800
`Facsimile:
`(212) 999-5800
`Email:
`tklausner@wsgr.com
`
`MEREDITH K. LOWRY, pending pro hac
`vice
`WRIGHT LINDSEY JENNINGS
`333 Pinnacle Hills Parkway, Suite 510
`Rogers, AR 72758
`Telephone: (479) 631-3282
`Facsimile:
`(479) 986-8932
`Email:
`mlowry@wlj.com
`
`MARK M. HENRY, pending pro hac vice
`ROSE LAW FIRM
`120 E. Fourth Street
`Little Rock, AR 72201-2893
`Telephone: (501) 375-9131
`Facsimile:
`(501) 375-1309
`Email:
`mhenry@roselawfirm.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`LIVERAMP, INC.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`CASE NO.:
`3:19-cv-2158
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
`JUDGMENT
`
`)))))))))))
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`KOCHAVA, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Plaintiff LiveRamp, Inc. (“LiveRamp”) brings this Complaint against Defendant Kochava,
`
`Inc. (“Kochava”) and alleges, on personal knowledge as to its own actions and on information and
`
`belief as to the actions of others, as follows:
`
`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
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 2 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`1.
`
`This Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and § 2202 (the
`
`Declaratory Judgment Act), 15 U.S.C. § 1121 (the Trademark Act), and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338. LiveRamp brings this action to resolve an actual and palpable controversy between the
`
`parties arising under the trademark laws of the United States.
`
`2.
`
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). A substantial part
`
`of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in this district, and Kochava resides in this district
`
`within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(2).
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`10
`
`3.
`
`LiveRamp is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at
`
`11
`
`225 Bush Street, 17th Floor, San Francisco, California 94104. LiveRamp is a global technology
`
`12
`
`company with a vision to power a world where connected data makes every experience
`
`13
`
`exceptional. LiveRamp offers for sale in commerce an identity resolution service leveraged by
`
`14
`
`brands and their partners to deliver innovative marketing and exceptional experiences across
`
`15
`
`marketing channels.
`
`16
`
`4.
`
`Kochava is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at
`
`17
`
`201 Church Street, Sandpoint, Idaho. Kochava is digital advertising analytics company that
`
`18
`
`primarily serves two particular markets: video gaming and fraud prevention.
`
`19
`
`5.
`
`LiveRamp brings this action for declaratory relief to protect its valuable and well-
`
`20
`
`known INDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks against groundless
`
`21
`
`trademark threats by Kochava.
`
`22
`
`23
`
`6.
`
`On October 12, 2016, LiveRamp announced a major rebranding of its identity
`
`resolution service as IdentityLink™. LiveRamp IdentityLink™ uses a proprietary method to
`
`24
`
`connect people, data, and applications across the digital and physical world to enable true people-
`
`25
`
`based, omnichannel marketing.
`
`26
`
`7.
`
`Starting before October 12, 2016 and continuing through the present, LiveRamp
`
`27
`
`has made a substantial investment in marketing and branding its IDENTITYLINK and
`
`28
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK products and services, and as a consequence, LiveRamp has
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 3 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`developed strong and well-recognized rights
`
`in
`
`its IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks.
`
`8.
`
`Notwithstanding LiveRamp’s established rights in the IDENTITYLINK and
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks, Kochava has (1) asserted that Kochava has superior rights
`
`to the IDENTITYLINK mark, (2) repeatedly accused LiveRamp of trademark infringement;
`
`(3) opposed LiveRamp’s application to register the IDENTITYLINK mark in the U.S. Patent and
`
`Trademark Office (“USPTO”); (4) declared Kochava’s rights to the exclusive use of the “identity
`
`link” term; (5) substantially altered Kochava’s use of the “identity link” term in a bad faith effort
`
`to manufacture artificial confusion in the marketplace; (6) threatened to seek to cancel
`
`10
`
`LiveRamp’s LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK mark; and (7) threatened to file a federal action
`
`11
`
`against LiveRamp.
`
`12
`
`9.
`
`LiveRamp therefore seeks a declaration that its use of the IDENTITYLINK mark
`
`13
`
`does not and will not infringe upon or otherwise violate any rights claimed by Kochava.
`
`14
`
`10.
`
`LiveRamp also seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction to prevent Kochava
`
`15
`
`from continuing (a) to threaten LiveRamp’s valuable trademark rights and (b) to engage in bad
`
`16
`
`faith efforts to manufacture artificial confusion in the marketplace regarding LiveRamp’s
`
`17
`
`IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks.
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`11.
`
`The parties are not in competition with one another.
`
`LIVERAMP’S IDENTITYLINK MARKS
`
`12.
`
`On October 12, 2016, LiveRamp announced a major rebranding of its identity
`
`21
`
`resolution service under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks.
`
`22
`
`13.
`
`Prior to LiveRamp’s announcement in October 2016, LiveRamp conducted
`
`23
`
`research to determine whether anyone else claimed rights in the IdentityLink term, or used
`
`24
`
`“IdentityLink” as a trademark for any product or service. LiveRamp discovered no conflicting
`
`25
`
`trademark-type usage of IDENTITYLINK or IDENTITY LINK in connection with any relevant
`
`26
`
`products or services. At the time of its rebranding LiveRamp had no knowledge of any trademark
`
`27
`
`claimants of IDENITYLINK as applied to any potentially competitive products or services.
`
`28
`
`LiveRamp adopted the IDENTITYLINK mark in good faith.
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 4 of 15
`
`14.
`
`Concurrently with its rebranding announcement on October 12, 2016, LiveRamp
`
`initiated a major branding rollout to build substantial market recognition of the IDENTITYLINK
`
`and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks. The rollout included but was not limited to marketing
`
`efforts on multimedia platforms, press releases through industry publications, and personalized
`
`emails sent to tens of thousands of past, present, and potential business partners and vendors.
`
`15.
`
`On October 12, 2016, LiveRamp filed a U.S. Trademark Application for the
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK mark in connection with the following goods and services:
`
`“Software as a Service (SaaS) services featuring software for resolution of the
`identity of individual consumers based on data pertaining to the consumers across
`multiple marketing channels, devices, and marketing platforms, and mapping
`identifiers for a known individual consumer to the channels, devices, and
`marketing platforms on which that individual consumer can be found, in order to
`execute and support multichannel marketing efforts, targeting specific consumers
`for marketing purposes, measurement of marketing campaign
`results,
`personalization of marketing messages to individual consumers, monetization of
`consumer marketing data, and consumer marketing data analytics”
`in
`International Class 042.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`The date of first use was identified as not later than October 12, 2016, and the application was
`
`15
`
`assigned Serial No. 87835607. The application listed California as the address for LiveRamp.
`
`16
`
`The application was approved and later published on August 8, 2018. Having received no public
`
`17
`
`opposition from any interested party claiming prior use, the registration issued on November 13,
`
`18
`
`2018. A true and correct copy of the Certificate of Registration for Reg. No. 5,605,763 (the
`
`19
`
`“LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK Registration”) is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by
`
`20
`
`reference.
`
`21
`
`16.
`
`The LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK Registration remains in full force and never has
`
`22
`
`been formally challenged by any entity or person.
`
`23
`
`17.
`
`Also on October 12, 2016, LiveRamp filed a U.S. Trademark Application for the
`
`24
`
`IDENTITYLINK mark in connection with the following goods and services:
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`“Software as a Service (SaaS) services featuring software for resolution of the
`identity of individual consumers based on data pertaining to the consumers across
`multiple marketing channels, devices, and marketing platforms, and mapping
`identifiers for a known individual consumer to the channels, devices, and
`marketing platforms on which that individual consumer can be found, in order to
`execute and support multichannel marketing efforts, targeting specific consumers
`for marketing purposes, measurement of marketing campaign
`results,
`personalization of marketing messages to individual consumers, monetization of
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 5 of 15
`
`consumer marketing data, and consumer marketing data analytics”
`International Class 042.
`
`in
`
`The date of first use was identified as not later than October 12, 2016, and the application was
`
`assigned Serial No. 87200487 (the “IDENTITYLINK Application”). The application listed
`
`California as the address for LiveRamp. The Trademark Examiner ultimately agreed the
`
`IDENTITYLINK Application met all statutory requirements to serve as a trademark and approved
`
`the application for publication. The USPTO published the IDENTITYLINK Application for
`
`opposition on September 19, 2017, and the application stood ready to be granted to the Principal
`
`Register.
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`LiveRamp owns common-law trademark rights in the IDENTITYLINK mark.
`
`Since at least October 12, 2016, LiveRamp has consistently and properly marked
`
`IDENTITYLINK™ and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK® with the public trademark notices.
`
`20.
`
`LiveRamp’s advertising investment across the national audience of likely
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`customers and clients has resulted in the IDENTITYLINK mark being recognized as the leading
`
`14
`
`identity resolution platform leveraged by both brands and their partners. Today, the top results of
`
`15
`
`a search for “Identitylink” return information specifically about LiveRamp’s services.
`
`16
`
`21.
`
`LiveRamp’s IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks also are
`
`17
`
`linked to LiveRamp’s substantial commercial success. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 2018,
`
`18
`
`LiveRamp reported $211 million in revenue attributed to its Connectivity segment attributed in
`
`19
`
`large part to subscription revenue for services sold under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`20
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks. LiveRamp has more than 650 partners utilizing its IdentityLink™
`
`21
`
`platform.
`
`22
`
`22.
`
`LiveRamp continues to invest substantial sums in the promotion of the
`
`23
`
`IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks and development of services sold
`
`24
`
`under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks.
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 6 of 15
`
`LIVERAMP’S IDENTITYLINK SERVICE
`
`23.
`
`A key feature of LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ service allows subscribers to reconcile
`
`and relate client data from many sources.
`
`24.
`
`As illustrated by the Figure A, an IdentityLink™ subscriber can receive
`
`information about consumers from many disparate inputs, such as gaming consoles, wearable
`
`technology (Apple watches), offline (food and retail) purchases, email, streaming music, television
`
`(e.g., set top boxes, Roku, Google connected sticks), and mobile telephones.
`
`Figure A
`
`25.
`
`The IdentityLink™ service uses proprietary technologies to resolve this fragmented
`data back to a single anonymous identifier representing a consumer. This allows IdentityLink™
`
`subscribers to create a measureable understanding of consumer behavior.
`
`KOCHAVA’S SHAM TRADEMARK CLAIMS
`
`26.
`
`In September 2016, one month prior to LiveRamp’s public launch of its rebranded
`
`IdentityLink™ service, executives and employees from LiveRamp (and LiveRamp’s then-parent
`
`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
`
`company Acxiom Corporation1) met with Kochava’s President and Chief Executive Officer
`
`Charles Manning. At the meeting, LiveRamp and Kochava’s executives discussed LiveRamp’s
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`1 Acxiom acquired LiveRamp in May 2014. In October 2018, LiveRamp became a stand-alone public company.
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 7 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`plan to rebrand its technology under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK
`
`marks and discussed potential business partnerships tied to LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ service.
`
`27.
`
`Thereafter, on October 2, 2016, Acxiom’s Vice President of Strategy and Corporate
`
`Development Neil Fried sent a follow-up email to Kochava’s President and CEO Charles Manning
`
`to confirm the substance of their New York meeting. Mr. Fried’s email specifically discussed and
`
`named LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ service.
`
`28.
`
`Ten days later, on October 12, 2016, Kochava’s Charles Manning received an
`
`email announcing the launch of LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ service at his Kochava work email
`address. The email both announced LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ service and explained the
`
`10
`
`functionality and features of the service. The email also contained a link to LiveRamp’s full press
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`release announcing LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ service and invited recipients to attend a webinar
`scheduled for October 20, 2016 that further explained the LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ platform.
`Manning read and forwarded the LiveRamp’s IdentityLink™ launch email to another Kochava
`
`14
`
`employee, commenting on LiveRamp’s use of the IDENTITYLINK mark.
`
`15
`
`29.
`
`Neither Manning nor anyone else at Kochava notified LiveRamp that Kochava had
`
`16
`
`any objection to LiveRamp’s use of the IDENTITYLINK or LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks
`
`17
`
`at the September 2016 meeting, after Mr. Fried’s October 2 email, or after the October 12 product
`
`18
`
`launch email.
`
`19
`
`30.
`
`Kochava instead chose to lay in wait while LiveRamp spread the word of the new
`
`20
`
`name for its identity resolution service and invested significantly to promote and build brand
`
`21
`
`recognition for the INDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks.
`
`22
`
`31.
`
`On September 28, 2017, more than a year after learning of LiveRamp’s intention to
`
`23
`
`rebrand its technology under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks and
`
`24
`
`almost one year after LiveRamp launched its IdentityLink™ service, Kochava sent a letter
`
`25
`
`demanding that LiveRamp withdraw the IDENTITYLINK Application. On October 19, 2017,
`
`26
`
`LiveRamp responded and denied that Kochava had used “IdentityLink” or “IDENTITY LINK” as
`
`27
`
`a trademark because Kochava never offered any product or service under the name “IdentityLink”
`
`28
`
`but instead inconsistently used the term to describe a feature of a separately branded service.
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 8 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`32.
`
`Then on January 17, 2018 – more than a year and three months after learning of
`
`LiveRamp’s re-branding and the last day to file an opposition to the IDENTITYLINK Application
`
`– Kochava instituted an opposition proceeding with the USPTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal
`
`Board (“TTAB”). In its TTAB filing, Kochava claimed there was a likelihood of trademark injury
`
`arising from LiveRamp’s use of the IDENTITYLINK mark. Kochava claimed a first use date of
`
`at least as early as August 12, 2012 on “software with audience attribution capability.” A true and
`
`correct copy of Kochava’s Notice of Opposition is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated
`
`by reference.
`
`33.
`
`At the time Kochava filed its Opposition, Kochava had not used the term
`
`10
`
`“IdentityLink” or any substantially similar term as the brand name for any product or service.
`
`11
`
`Kochava had not used the IDENTITYLINK mark in commerce, and Kochava had made no effort
`
`12
`
`to establish any public recognition of “IdentityLink” or any substantially similar term as
`
`13
`
`associated with Kochava. At most, Kochava used the terms “Identity link” or “IdentityLink” in
`
`14
`
`sporadic, casual or transitory fashion and not in a deliberate or continuous fashion.
`
`15
`
`34.
`
`Prior to October 2016, to the extent that Kochava used the terms “Identity link” or
`
`16
`
`“IdentityLink,” Kochava inconsistently used those terms to the public as descriptors and did not
`
`17
`
`associate those terms to any known and developed Kochava product or service offered in
`
`18
`
`commerce.
`
`19
`
`35.
`
`Kochava has no sales or revenues linked to products or services branded as
`
`20
`
`“IDENTITYLINK” or “IDENTITY LINK.”
`
`21
`
`36.
`
`Kochava has not advertised any product or service bearing an “IDENTITYLINK”
`
`22
`
`or “IDENTITY LINK” mark; Kochava has had no positive growth trend across any defined
`
`23
`
`customer or market for any products or services bearing an “IDENTITYLINK” or “IDENTITY
`
`24
`
`LINK” mark; and Kochava does not have any mechanism by which a customer can purchase any
`
`25
`
`product or service sold under an “IDENTITYLINK” or “IDENTITY LINK” brand.
`
`26
`
`37.
`
`Prior to 2018, Kochava did not spend any money or time promoting an
`
`27
`
`“IDENTITYLINK” or “IDENTITY LINK” brand.
`
`28
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 9 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`KOCHAVA’S RECENT BAD FAITH USE OF THE IDENTITYLINK BRAND
`
`38.
`
`Long after LiveRamp’s successful rebranding of its identity resolution service
`
`under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks and registration of its
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK mark, and following Kochava’s opposing LiveRamp’s application
`
`to register IDENTITY LINK, Kochava changed its use of the “IdentityLink” term in a bad faith
`
`effort to manufacture the appearance of trademark rights, concoct evidence for legal proceedings,
`
`and attempt to extract a windfall payment from LiveRamp.
`
`39.
`
`In particular, in mid-2018, Kochava made changes to its website and substantially
`
`and materially altered its use of the IdentityLink “feature.” Kochava has changed its description
`
`10
`
`of its Identity Link feature to make it appear similar to the services that LiveRamp has offered
`
`11
`
`under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks since at least October of
`
`12
`
`2016.
`
`13
`
`40.
`
`Not only has Kochava purposefully changed the manner and frequency of its use of
`
`14
`
`the term “IdentityLink” to attempt to improve its position as a late-comer to the IDENTITYLINK
`
`15
`
`mark, Kochava has deliberately sought to create artificial evidence of confusion in the
`
`16
`
`marketplace.
`
`17
`
`41.
`
`For example, Kochava’s newly reworked webpage includes a new graphic
`
`18
`
`depicting a centralized collection of consumer data from multiple data sources including gaming
`
`19
`
`consoles, Apple watches, email, television set top boxes, and smartphones, mimicking the figure
`
`20
`
`used by LiveRamp. See Figure B.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 10 of 15
`
`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
`
`Figure B
`
`42.
`
`Kochava intentionally and willfully changed the manner and frequency of its use of
`
`the term “IdentityLink” in 2018 with the express purpose of targeting LiveRamp’s customers and
`
`creating artificial evidence it could rely on to extort LiveRamp. LiveRamp has been using the
`
`IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks for two years concurrent with
`
`Kochava’s use of the term “Identity Link” without evidence of any customer confusion.
`
`43.
`
`On February 15, 2019, nearly two and a half years after LiveRamp announced the
`
`rebranding of its identity resolution service under the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks, Kochava issued a press release entitled: “Kochava Announces Latest
`
`Enhancements to IdentityLink, Giving Marketers a Clearer View of Their User Journeys.” In the
`
`press release, Kochava targets mobile marketers that overlap with LiveRamp’s customer base. A
`
`true and correct copy of Kochava’s February 15, 2019 press release is attached hereto as Exhibit C
`
`and incorporated by reference.
`
`44.
`
`Kochava’s new use of term “IdentityLink” was expressly designed to damage
`
`LiveRamp. Because LiveRamp’s principal place of business is in San Francisco, California, the
`
`effect of Kochava’s bad faith conduct is felt by LiveRamp in San Francisco, California.
`
`45.
`
`In addition, Kochava has deliberately targeted California purchasers and potential
`
`purchasers. Among other things, Kochava has sales personnel who live and work in the San
`
`Francisco Bay Area and who are now promoting IDENTITYLINK as a Kochava offering.
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 11 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`Kochava has other personnel who travel to the San Francisco Bay Area to promote and market
`
`Kochava’s services, including promoting IDENTITYLINK as a Kochava offering. And Kochava
`
`is planning to market IDENTITYLINK as a Kochava offering at a trade show in San Francisco on
`
`April 29-30, 2019.
`
`46.
`
`On March 27, 2019, Kochava sent a demand letter and proposed Memorandum of
`
`Understanding (“MOU”) to LiveRamp offering to cease all use of the IDENTITYLINK mark and
`
`refrain from challenging LiveRamp’s right to use such mark in exchange for a multi-million dollar
`
`monetary payment. The MOU was addressed to LiveRamp at its San Francisco address of 667
`
`Mission Street, 4th Floor, San Francisco, California. The demand letter set forth a variety of
`
`10
`
`threatened actions if LiveRamp did not agree to Kochava’s terms. Among other things, Kochava
`
`11
`
`threatened to a file “a TTAB Cancellation of LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK.” Kochava also stated
`
`12
`
`that “Kochava would initiate USDC litigation, if LiveRamp did not voluntarily cease use of the
`
`13
`
`[IDENTITYLINK] mark” and would seek “an injunction” to bar LiveRamp from using either the
`
`14
`
`IDENTITYLINK or LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks.
`
`15
`
`47.
`
`Kochava has engaged in a deliberate effort to create the illusion of rights to the
`
`16
`
`IDENTITYLINK mark while issuing repeated threats and attacks against LiveRamp’s increasingly
`
`17
`
`valuable IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks. Accordingly, LiveRamp
`
`18
`
`files this complaint to affirm its superior rights to the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`19
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks and to enjoin Kochava from continuing (a) to threaten LiveRamp’s
`
`20
`
`valuable trademark rights and (b) to engage in bad faith conduct in connection with its marketing.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`COUNT I
`
`(Declaratory Judgment)
`
`48.
`
`LiveRamp realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of all prior
`
`24
`
`paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
`
`25
`
`49.
`
`As a result of the actions and statements of Kochava, which include allegations of
`
`26
`
`trademark infringement and threats to commence litigation and cancellation proceedings before
`
`27
`
`the TTAB concerning LiveRamp’s right to continued commercial use of the IDENTITYLINK and
`
`28
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks, there is an actual controversy between LiveRamp and
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 12 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`Kochava as to LiveRamp’s rights and legal relations associated with its use of the
`
`IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks. Under all of the circumstances, an
`
`immediate, real and substantial controversy exists between the parties, who have adverse legal
`
`interests.
`
`50.
`
`LiveRamp has used and intends to keep using the IDENTITYLINK and
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks in interstate commerce.
`
`51.
`
`Kochava’s position is that LiveRamp’s use of the IDENTITYLINK and
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks violates Kochava’s trademark rights.
`
`52.
`
`LiveRamp’s federally registered LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK mark does not
`
`10
`
`infringe upon, dilute, or violate any federal or state trademark, trade name, or related rights of
`
`11
`
`Kochava.
`
`12
`
`53.
`
`LiveRamp’s common law IDENTITYLINK mark does not infringe upon, dilute, or
`
`13
`
`violate any federal or state trademark, trade name, or related rights of Kochava.
`
`14
`
`54.
`
`LiveRamp’s rights to the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK
`
`15
`
`marks are superior to the rights that Kochava now alleges.
`
`16
`
`55.
`
`LiveRamp acted in good faith and did not act willfully against the interests of
`
`17
`
`Kochava, but Kochava has acted in bad faith and has unclean hands.
`
`18
`
`56.
`
`Kochava is equitably estopped from enforcing any common law trademark rights,
`
`19
`
`if any, by virtue of its unclean hands, bad faith, or other inequitable conduct such that were there
`
`20
`
`any common law trademark rights available to Kochava, it is estopped from enforcing them
`
`21
`
`relative to LiveRamp.
`
`22
`
`57.
`
`Kochava is barred by the doctrine of laches from enforcing any common law
`
`23
`
`trademark rights it has in the IDENTITYLINK mark or any substantially equivalent mark because
`
`24
`
`Kochava unreasonably delayed in enforcing its rights, if any, and such delay caused prejudice to
`
`25
`
`LiveRamp.
`
`26
`
`58.
`
`An actual justiciable controversy within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 2201 exists
`
`27
`
`between LiveRamp and Kochava concerning the use of the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`28
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks and the respective trademark rights of the parties. A judicial
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 13 of 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`determination is necessary and appropriate at this time in order to resolve the issues of the
`
`trademark rights of LiveRamp and the conflicting claims of Kochava, and in order that the parties
`
`may ascertain their respective rights and obligations.
`
`59.
`
`LiveRamp does not engage in any activities that violate any lawful rights of
`
`Kochava and is entitled to a declaration to that effect in this action.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`LiveRamp prays for judgment as follows:
`
`1.
`
`Declaring that LiveRamp’s use and registration of the IDENTITYLINK and
`
`LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks do not infringe upon, dilute, or otherwise violate any valid
`
`10
`
`right of Kochava under applicable federal or state law;
`
`11
`
`2.
`
`Declaring that LiveRamp’s rights in the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`12
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks are superior to any rights of Kochava to such marks;
`
`13
`
`3.
`
`Granting a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining and restraining
`
`14
`
`Kochava and its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and those in active
`
`15
`
`concert or participation with them, from
`
`(i)
`
`directly or indirectly charging infringement, dilution, or other legal
`
`violation, or instituting any action for infringement, dilution, or other
`
`violation of alleged rights of Kochava in the term “identity link” or
`
`“IdentityLink” against LiveRamp or any of LiveRamp’s agents,
`
`direct or indirect customers, or any person, by reason of the use or
`
`registration of LiveRamp’s IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks; and
`
`(ii)
`
`using or displaying
`
`the
`
`IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP
`
`IDENTITYLINK marks or any substantially similar marks in a bad
`
`faith effort to confuse LiveRamp’s IDENTITYLINK customers and
`
`prospective customers;
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`LIVERAMP, INC.’S COMPLAINT
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-02158 Document 1 Filed 04/22/19 Page 14 of 15
`
`4.
`
`Awarding to LiveRamp its reasonable costs, disbursements, and attorneys’ fees
`
`incurred in defending its rights to the IDENTITYLINK and LIVERAMP IDENTITYLINK marks
`
`against the claims and conduct of Kochava; and
`
`5.
`
`Granting such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
`
`Dated: April 22, 2019
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & R

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket