Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement

17743254v.1
Kevin M. Hayes, OSB #012801
Email: kevin.hayes@klarquist.com
KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP
121 S.W. Salmon Street, Suite 1600
Portland, Oregon 97204
Telephone: 503-595-5300
Facsimile: 503-595-5301

Kenneth L. Wilton (pro hac vice to be filed)
Email: kwilton@seyfarth.com
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: (310) 277-7200
Facsimile: (310) 201-5219

Attorneys for Plaintiff
RUDYS BARBER SHOP, L.L.C.



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

PORTLAND DIVISION

RUDYS BARBER SHOP, L.L.C., a
Washington limited liability company,

Plaintiff,

v.

RUDYS BARBER SHOP LLC, an Oregon
limited liability company, and RUDOLPH
VALENTINO MARTINEZ, an individual,

Defendants.

Civil No. _________
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT,
FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION, AND
TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH
BUSINESS RELATIONS
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL


PLAINTIFF RUDYS BARBER SHOP, L.L.C. (Plaintiff), through its attorneys,
complains of Defendants RUDYS BARBER SHOP LLC and RUDOLPH VALENTINO
Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page l of 8
Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement
2
17743254v.1
MARTINEZ (collectively Defendants) and alleges as follows, upon knowledge with respect to
itself and its own acts, and upon information and belief as to all other matters:
I. THE RUDYS MARK AND THE NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. In or about 1992, Plaintiff began use of the mark RUDYS in connection with
hairdressing salons and haircutting services. Since opening its first location under the RUDYS
mark in Seattle, Washington, Plaintiff has opened fifteen (15) additional locations in Seattle,
Portland, Oregon, Los Angeles, California and New York, New York. Because of the nature of
the services Plaintiff offers under the RUDYS mark, and substantial positive publicity in the
local and national press, the RUDYS mark has become very well known in the United States.
2. Since in or about 1998, Plaintiff has operated a website at the URL
WWW.RUDYSBARBERSHOP.COM (Plaintiffs Website) that includes, among other features, the
prominent display of the RUDYs mark. In 2011, Plaintiff added a feature to Plaintiffs Website
that it labeled Shop which includes links to products sold under the RUDYs mark. In 2012,
Plaintiff added a feature to Plaintiffs Website that it labeled Photo Booth which includes
photographs of customers of Plaintiff and interiors of some of Plaintiffs stores.
3. Plaintiff owns Federal Trademark Registration No. 2,651,510, issued on
November 19, 2002, for the RUDYS mark for Hairdressing Salons, Beauty Salons and
Haircutting Services. A copy of the certificate of registration for Registration No. 2,651,510 is
attached hereto as Exhibit A. Registration No. 2,651,510 is now incontestable under Section 15
of the United States Trademark Act (15 U.S.C. 1065), providing Plaintiff with the conclusive
and exclusive right to use the RUDYS mark in connection with the listed services throughout
the United States, including within this judicial district.
4. Notwithstanding Plaintiffs exclusive right to use the RUDYS mark in
connection with hairdressing salons, beauty salons and haircutting services, in or about 2009
Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page 2 of 8
Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement
3
17743254v.1
Defendants commenced using the mark RUDYS in connection with providing virtually
identical services (Defendants Services) at a location in Portland, Oregon, that is less than 12
miles from the two locations that had long previously been operated by Plaintiff under the
RUDYS mark.
5. In addition, in or about 2013, Defendants commenced operating a website located
at the URL WWW.RUDYTHEBARBER.COM (Defendants Website). Like Plaintiffs Website,
Defendants Website includes references to and photographs of RUDYS BARBER SHOP,
includes portions of the site labeled Photo Booth and Shop, and includes an email address
for contact information that incorporates the domain name owned by Plaintiff, namely
Rudy@rudysbarbershop.com.
6. Defendants have intentionally attempted to divert customers from Plaintiffs
locations in Portland by the use of a confusingly similar name for their store, by using elements
of Plaintiffs website and domain name on Defendants website, and, as set forth below, by
intentionally making verbal misrepresentations regarding Plaintiffs employees.
7. Plaintiff therefore brings this suit to stop Defendants from causing further
confusion with Plaintiffs senior RUDYS mark, thereby resulting in the diversion of customers
and the diminishing of the goodwill associated with Plaintiffs RUDYS mark.
II. THE PARTIES
8. Plaintiff Rudys Barbershop L.L.C. is a limited liability corporation organized
under the laws of the State of Washington, with its principal place of business in Seattle,
Washington. Plaintiff operates two stores in Portland, Oregon, within this judicial district.
9. Defendant Rudys Barber Shop LLC is a limited liability corporation organized
under the laws of the State of Oregon, with a principal place of business located at 12555 SW
Main St., Portland, Oregon 97223, within this judicial district.
Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page 3 of 8
Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement
4
17743254v.1
10. Defendant Rudolph Valentino Martinez is an individual, a Manager of Defendant
Rudys Barber Shop LLC, and has a business address of at 12555 SW Main St., Portland,
Oregon, within this judicial district.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
11. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action because this
action arises under the Federal Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051-1127, jurisdiction being
conferred in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 1121 and 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338. Supplemental
jurisdiction over the claims under Oregon state law is proper as those claims are substantially
related to the claims over which the Court has original jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1338(b) and 1367.
12. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) in that Defendants are doing and
transacting business within this judicial district and have committed acts complained of herein in
this judicial district.
IV. CLAIMS
A. Infringement of Federally-Registered Trademark
13. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in the above
paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
14. Defendants use of the RUDYS mark as aforesaid constitutes the use in
commerce of a reproduction, copy, or colorable imitation of the registered RUDYS Mark in
connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, and advertisement of Defendants
Services, which use is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the source
or origin of Defendants Services, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114(1).
15. Defendants use of a copy of Plaintiffs registered RUDYS mark was made with
actual or constructive knowledge of Plaintiffs rights in Plaintiffs registered RUDYS mark.
Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page 4 of 8
Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement
5
17743254v.1
16. Defendants use of a copy of Plaintiffs registered RUDYS mark is without
Plaintiffs consent or permission.
17. Defendants acts of trademark infringement, unless enjoined, will cause Plaintiff
to sustain monetary damages, loss, and injury.
18. Plaintiff is without an adequate remedy at law because Defendants use of a copy
of Plaintiffs registered RUDYS mark is causing irreparable injury to Plaintiff, and unless said
acts are enjoined by this Court, they will continue and Plaintiff will continue to suffer irreparable
injury.
B. Federal Unfair Competition
19. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in the above
paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
20. Defendants use of the RUDYS mark in connection with Defendants Services
constitutes the use in commerce of a word, term, name, symbol, or device, which use is likely to
cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive, as to the affiliation, connection, or
association of Defendants with Plaintiff, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of
Defendants Services or Defendants commercial activities by Plaintiff, in violation of 15 U.S.C.
1125(a)(1).
21. Defendants unfair competition as aforesaid has caused and continues to cause
irreparable harm to Plaintiff.
22. Unless restrained and enjoined by this Court, Defendants will persist in their
unfair competition, thereby causing Plaintiff further irreparable harm.
23. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.
Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page 5 of 8
Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement
6
17743254v.1
C. Intentional Interference With Business Relations
24. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in the above
paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
25. Defendants have, on at least one occasion, received a telephone call from a
customer of one of Plaintiffs two Portland, Oregon locations seeking to make an appointment
for services. Instead of re-directing the call to Plaintiff, Defendants informed Plaintiffs
customer that the specific stylist no longer worked at the store and, further, that the stylist was
currently in a rehabilitation facility due to an abuse of drugs or alcohol.
26. Defendants comments as set forth above were made without privilege and with
the specific intent to induce Plaintiffs customer not to enter into or continue a business
relationship with Plaintiff, in violation of Oregon law.
27. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the actions described above have been
repeated with other of Plaintiffs customers who have been misdirected to Defendants through
Defendants unauthorized use of Plaintiffs RUDYS mark.
28. As a result of Defendants action, Plaintiff has been damaged both monetarily and
through a lessening of the goodwill associated with the RUDYS mark.
29. Defendants intentional interference with Plaintiffs business relations as
aforesaid has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to Plaintiff.
30. Unless restrained and enjoined by this Court, Defendants will persist in their
intentional interference with Plaintiffs business relations, thereby causing Plaintiff further
irreparable harm.
31. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.
Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page 6 of 8
Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement
7
17743254v.1
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Rudys Barber Shop, L.L.C. prays that, pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
1116 to 1125 and Oregon state common law:
A. The Court finds that Plaintiff owns valid and subsisting trademark rights in the
RUDYS mark.
B. Defendants be held liable under each claim for relief set forth in this Complaint.
C. The Court grant an injunction that Defendants and their agents, servants,
employees, and attorneys, and all other persons in active concert or participation with them, be
enjoined from using RUDYS (however spelled or punctuated, whether capitalized,
abbreviated, singular or plural, printed or stylized, whether alone or in combination with any
word(s), punctuation or symbol(s), and whether used in caption, text, orally or otherwise), or any
other reproduction, counterfeit, copy, colorable imitation or confusingly similar variation of the
RUDYS mark, as a trademark or service mark, trade name or domain name, or in advertising,
distribution, sale, or offering for sale of haircutting and related services.
D. The Court order as part of the injunction and pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1116(a) that
Defendants file with the Court and serve on Plaintiff within thirty days after the service on the
Defendants of the injunction, a report in writing under oath setting forth in detail the manner and
form in which the Defendants have complied with the injunction.
E. Defendant be required to pay to Plaintiff profits made in connection with its use
of the RUDYS mark, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117 and the equity powers of this Court.
F. Defendant be required to pay to Plaintiff its reasonable attorneys fees and
disbursements incurred herein, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117 and the equity powers of this Court.
G. Defendant be required to pay to Plaintiff the costs of this action.
Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page 7 of 8
Complaint For Federal Trademark Infringement
8
17743254v.1
H. The Court award Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Court deems just
and equitable.
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Rudys Barber Shop, L.L.C., hereby
demands a jury trial as to all issues so triable in this action.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: September 17, 2014 By: s/ Kevin M. Hayes

Associated counsel:

Kenneth L. Wilton (pro hac vice to be filed)
Email: kwilton@seyfarth.com
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: (310) 277-7200
Facsimile: (310) 201-5219
Kevin M. Hayes, OSB #012801
Email: kevin.hayes@klarquist.com
121 S.W. Salmon Street, Suite 1600
Portland, Oregon 97204
Telephone: 503-595-5300
Facsimile: 503-595-5301

Attorneys for Plaintiff
RUDYS BARBER SHOP, L.L.C.


Case 3:l4-cv-0l48l-MO Document l Filed 09/l7/l4 Page 8 of 8