Docstoc

wizard of ads

Document Sample
wizard of ads Powered By Docstoc
					       Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 1 of 9



                      IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                     FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

                                 )
ROY H. WILLIAMS MARKETING, INC., )
                                 )
          Plaintiff,             )
                                 )
     v.                          )
                                 )                              Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-03115
THE WIZARD OF ADS, INC.,
                                 )
CHUCK MORRIS, and
                                 )
SANDY MORRIS,
                                 )
          Defendants.            )
                                 )

                          PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

       Plaintiff Roy H. Williams Marketing, Inc., by and through its undersigned attorneys, files

this Original Complaint against Defendants The Wizard of Ads, Inc., Chuck Morris, and Sandy

Morris, and alleges the following:

                                              I.
                                           PARTIES

       1.      Plaintiff Roy H. Williams Marketing, Inc. (“RHWM”) is a Texas corporation with

its principal place of business at 16221 Crystal Hills Drive, Austin, Hays County, Texas 78737.

       2.      Upon information and belief, Defendant The Wizard of Ads, Inc. (“Louisiana

Wizard”) is a Louisiana corporation with its principal place of business at 23141 Brook Forest

Road, Abita Springs, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana 70420.

       3.      Upon information and belief, Defendant Chuck Morris (“Chuck”) is an individual

resident and citizen of the State of Louisiana with his last known address at 23141 Brook Forest

Road, Abita Springs, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana 70420.

       4.      Upon information and belief, Defendant Sandy Morris (“Sandy”) is an individual

resident and citizen of the State of Louisiana with her last known address at 23141 Brook Forest



PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 1
       Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 2 of 9



Road, Abita Springs, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana 70420.

       5.      Louisiana Wizard, Chuck, and Sandy are sometimes referred to herein

collectively as “Defendants”.

                                               II.
                                          JURISDICTION

       6.      Upon information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Louisiana

Wizard because Louisiana Wizard is a citizen of, and has its principal place of business in,

Louisiana. Louisiana Wizard may be served with process as provided under FED. R. CIV. P. 4(c)

and 4(h)(1) by delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to an officer, a managing

or general agent, and/or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service

of process, namely: to Chuck, an officer of Louisiana Wizard, at his last known residence or

usual place of business, 23141 Brookforest Road, Abita Springs, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana

70420; and/or to Sandy, an officer of and the registered agent for service of process of Louisiana

Wizard, at her last known residence, usual place of business or Louisiana Wizard’s registered

office, 23141 Brook Forest Road, Abita Springs, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana 70420 or 23141

Brookforest Road, Abita Springs, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana 70420. The foregoing names

and addresses of Louisiana Wizard’s officers and registered agent is derived from information

registered with the Commercial Division of the Louisiana Secretary of State.

       7.      Upon information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Chuck

because Chuck is a citizen of, and resides in, Louisiana. Chuck may be served with process as

provided under FED. R. CIV. P. 4(c) and 4(e)(2) by delivering a copy of the summons and of the

complaint to Chuck personally, or by leaving a copy of the summons and of the complaint at

Chuck’s dwelling or usual place of abode (namely, 23141 Brookforest Road, Abita Springs, St.

Tammany Parish, Louisiana 70420) with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides



PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 2
         Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 3 of 9



there.   The foregoing address for Chuck is derived from information registered with the

Commercial Division of the Louisiana Secretary of State.

         8.    Upon information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Sandy

because Sandy is a citizen of, and resides in, Louisiana. Sandy may be served with process as

provided under FED. R. CIV. P. 4(c) and 4(e)(2) by delivering a copy of the summons and of the

complaint to Sandy personally, or by leaving a copy of the summons and of the complaint at

Sandy’s dwelling or usual place of abode (namely, 23141 Brookforest Road, Abita Springs, St.

Tammany Parish, Louisiana 70420) with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides

there.    The foregoing address for Sandy is derived from information registered with the

Commercial Division of the Louisiana Secretary of State.

         9.    The Court has subject matter jurisdiction because this lawsuit arises under

subchapter 3 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1111 et seq. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question

jurisdiction) & 1338(a)-(b) (trademark and unfair competition jurisdiction).

                                              III.
                                             VENUE

         10.   Venue is proper in this judicial district because all Defendants reside in this

judicial district. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1). Venue is also proper in this judicial district because a

substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to RHWM’s claims occurred in this

judicial district. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2).

                                          IV.
                                   STATEMENT OF FACTS

         11.   RHWM provides various advertising and marketing services, such as, by way of

example only, consulting services in the fields of advertising and marketing, and ad writing.

         12.   RHWM, through years of substantial and continuous use, has acquired valuable

trademark rights and associated goodwill in the word mark WIZARD OF ADS (the “RHWM


PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 3
       Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 4 of 9



Marks”). In connection with the Mark, RHWM owns a valid, subsisting and incontestable

federal trademark registration on the Principal Register, U.S. Registration No. 2823355 (the

“Registration”), for various goods and services, including, for example, “printed matter, namely

books, manuals and brochures for use in the fields of advertising and marketing”; “advertising

agency services”; “business consultation in the fields of advertising and marketing”; and

“educational services, namely providing seminars, classes, and workshops in the fields of

advertising and marketing”. These trademark rights are protected through common law rights

and the Registration. As such, RHWM has the exclusive right to use the RHWM Marks and,

among other rights, has the right to stop those who use marks confusingly similar thereto.

       13.      Upon information and belief, Louisiana Wizard is a direct competitor of RHWM,

and provides various advertising and marketing industry goods and services, such as, by way of

example only, consulting services in the fields of advertising and marketing, and ad writing.

       14.      Upon information and belief, the domain names <thewizardofadsla.com> and

<incentivesla.com> are registered to and controlled by Louisiana Wizard.

       15.      Upon information and belief, Louisiana Wizard owns and operates the websites

located at <thewizardofadsla.com> and <incentivesla.com>, and uses these websites to, among

other things, offer and promote its above-described advertising and marketing industry goods

and services.

       16.      Upon information and belief, Chuck and Sandy are the owners and officers and/or

directors of Louisiana Wizard.

       17.      Upon information and belief, Louisiana Wizard has used in commerce the name

“The Wizard of Ads, Inc.” and the domain name <thewizardofadsla.com> (collectively, the

“Infringing Marks”) in connection with its above-described advertising and marketing industry




PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 4
       Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 5 of 9



goods and services.

       18.    Upon information and belief, RHWM’s use of the RHWM Marks is senior to

Louisiana Wizard’s use of the Infringing Marks.

       19.    Louisiana Wizard’s use of the Infringing Marks is made without RHWM’s

consent or permission.

                                          V.
                                   CAUSES OF ACTION

                                             A.
                         Count 1 – Federal Trademark Infringement

       20.    RHWM incorporates paragraphs 1 to 19 herein by reference.

       21.    The Infringing Marks are reproductions, counterfeits, copies, or colorable

imitations of the federally registered RHWM Marks. Louisiana Wizard’s unauthorized use in

commerce of the Infringing Marks in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution,

and/or advertising of its above-described advertising and marketing industry goods and services

is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive with respect to the federally

registered RHWM Marks. Such acts constitute trademark infringement in violation of section

32(1)(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)(a), and RHWM has been injured as a result.

       22.    Further, as alleged above, Chuck and Sandy are the owners and officers and/or

directors of Louisiana Wizard. As such, and upon information and belief, Chuck and Sandy

intentionally induced Louisiana Wizard to commit the aforementioned trademark infringements.

Accordingly, Chuck and Sandy are contributorily liable for Louisiana Wizard’s aforementioned

trademark infringements.

       23.    Accordingly, RHWM seeks, at its later election, an award of: (a) Defendants’

respective profits and any actual damages sustained by RHWM, as well as an enhancement of

the amounts found as actual damages not exceeding three times such amounts; or (b) statutory


PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 5
        Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 6 of 9



damages. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1117(a) & 1117(c).

        24.    Additionally, RHWM seeks the delivery and destruction of all articles of

Louisiana Wizard’s goods and services which make use of the Infringing Marks in a manner that

infringes upon the federally registered RHWM Marks as alleged above. 15 U.S.C. § 1118.

        25.    Additionally, RHWM seeks a permanent injunction restraining Defendants from

further infringing the federally registered RHWM Marks as alleged above because: (a) RHWM

has suffered and/or will suffer an irreparable injury; (b) other remedies available at law, such as

monetary damages, are inadequate to fully compensate RHWM for that injury; (c) a remedy in

equity is warranted; and (d) the public interest will not be disserved by an injunction, permanent

or otherwise. 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a).

        26.    Additionally, upon information and belief, Defendants’ alleged misconduct is

willful, intentional, and/or conducted in bad faith, thereby rendering this case exceptional within

the meaning of section 35(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1117(a), for which RHWM seeks an

award of its reasonable attorney fees for this action and any appeals thereof pursuant to

applicable law.

        27.    Additionally, RHWM seeks an award of the costs of this action and any appeals

thereof pursuant to applicable law. E.g., 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).

        28.    Finally, RHWM seeks pre- and post-judgment interest on the principal amounts it

will recover for this action and any appeals thereof pursuant to applicable law. E.g., 28 U.S.C. §

1961.

                                             B.
                   Count 2 – Violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act

        29.    RHWM incorporates paragraphs 1 to 19 herein by reference.

        30.    Louisiana Wizard’s unauthorized use in commerce of the Infringing Marks in



PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 6
       Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 7 of 9



connection with its above-described advertising and marketing industry goods and services

and/or as a false designation of origin is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to

deceive as to: (a) the affiliation, connection, or association of Louisiana Wizard with RHWM;

and/or (b) the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Louisiana Wizard’s goods, services, or

commercial activities by RHWM. Such acts constitute violations of section 43(a)(1)(A) of the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A) (“Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act”), and RHWM has

been injured as a result.

       31.     Further, as alleged above, Chuck and Sandy are the owners and officers and/or

directors of Louisiana Wizard. As such, and upon information and belief, Chuck and Sandy

intentionally induced Louisiana Wizard to commit the aforementioned violations of Section

43(a) of the Lanham Act. Accordingly, Chuck and Sandy are contributorily liable for Louisiana

Wizard’s aforementioned violations of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act.

       32.     Accordingly, RHWM seeks an award of Defendants’ respective profits and any

actual damages sustained by RHWM, as well as an enhancement of the amounts found as actual

damages not exceeding three times such amounts. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1117(a) & 1117(c).

       33.     Additionally, RHWM seeks the delivery and destruction of all articles of

Louisiana Wizard’s goods and services which make use of the Infringing Marks in a manner that

violates Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act as alleged above. 15 U.S.C. § 1118.

       34.     Additionally, RHWM seeks a permanent injunction restraining Defendants from

further violating Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act in the manners alleged above because: (a)

RHWM has suffered and/or will suffer an irreparable injury; (b) other remedies available at law,

such as monetary damages, are inadequate to fully compensate RHWM for that injury; (c) a

remedy in equity is warranted; and (d) the public interest will not be disserved by an injunction,




PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 7
        Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 8 of 9



permanent or otherwise. 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a).

        35.    Additionally, upon information and belief, Defendants’ alleged misconduct is

willful, intentional, and/or conducted in bad faith, thereby rendering this case exceptional within

the meaning of section 35(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1117(a), for which RHWM seeks an

award of its reasonable attorney fees for this action and any appeals thereof pursuant to

applicable law.

        36.    Additionally, RHWM seeks an award of the costs of this action and any appeals

thereof pursuant to applicable law. E.g., 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).

        37.    Finally, RHWM seeks pre- and post-judgment interest on the principal amounts it

will recover for this action and any appeals thereof pursuant to applicable law. E.g., 28 U.S.C. §

1961.

                                          VI.
                                 CONDITIONS PRECEDENT

        38.    All conditions precedent to RHWM’s claims have occurred or been performed.

                                               VII.
                                             PRAYER

        39.    For these reasons, RHWM respectfully asks the Court:

                  a.   for a judgment in favor of RHWM on Counts 1 and/or 2 above;

                  b.   for an award of actual damages plus profits according to law and/or an
                       award of statutory damages plus profits according to law;

                  c.   for the enhancement of any amounts of actual damages awarded according
                       to law;

                  d.   for the delivery and destruction of all infringing articles according to law;

                  e.   for a permanent injunction against Defendants according to law, and as
                       described further above;

                  f.   for an award of attorney fees according to law;

                  g.   for an award of costs according to law;


PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 8
        Case 2:13-cv-03115-HGB-DEK Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 9 of 9



                 h.       for pre- and post-judgment interest according to law; and

                 i.       for such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

                                                        Respectfully submitted,

                                                        JACKSON WALKER L.L.P.

                                                        By:s/ Robert B. Neblett III
                                                           Robert B. Neblett III (Trial Attorney)
                                                           Louisiana Bar No. 14659
                                                           100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1100
                                                           Austin, Texas 78701
                                                           (512) 236-2000 – Telephone
                                                           (512) 236-2002 – Facsimile
                                                           E-mail: rneblett@jw.com

                                                        ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
                                                        ROY H. WILLIAMS MARKETING, INC.




9142084v.4 125816/00014
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – PAGE 9

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:4
posted:5/20/2013
language:Unknown
pages:9