Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Case No.:
16
Plaintiff,
17
18
19
20
vs.
CHRISTOPHER BROWN AKA CHRIS
BROWN, an individual; and DOES 125, inclusive,
21
22
23
24
25
26
COMPLAINT FOR
Defendants.
(1) TRADEMARK
INFRINGEMENT (15 U.S.C.
1114)
(2) FEDERAL UNFAIR
COMPETITION (15 U.S.C.
1125(a))
(3) CALIFORNIA COMMON
LAW TRADEMARK
INFRINGMENT
(4) STATUTORY UNFAIR
COMPETITION (CAL. BUS.
& PROF. CODE 17200)
[Demand for Jury Trial]
27
28
COMPLAINT
4
5
1.
This action arises under the federal trademark statute (the Lanham
Act), 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq., and under the common law of the State of
California. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the federal trademark,
false advertising, and unfair competition claims pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1121 and 28
U.S.C. 1331, 1332, 1338, and 1367. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction
10
over the related California state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1338 and 1367.
11
The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the third and fourth claims pursuant to
12
28 U.S.C. 1367.
13
2.
14
3.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that this
15
Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because he resides in this judicial
16
district, has extensive contacts with, and conducts business within, the State of
17
California and this judicial district; Defendant has caused KONFUSED products to
18
be advertised, promoted, and sold in this judicial district; the causes of action
19
asserted in this Complaint arise out of Defendants contacts with this judicial
20
district; and because Defendant has caused injury to Plaintiff in this judicial district.
21
4.
22
(c) because Defendant resides in this judicial district; Defendant has extensive
23
contacts with, and conducts business within, the State of California and this judicial
24
25
and sold in this judicial district; the causes of action asserted in this Complaint arise
26
out of Defendants contacts with this judicial district; and because Defendant has
27
28
-2COMPLAINT
THE PARTIES
1
2
3
4
5.
County, California.
6.
aka Chris Brown is an individual who also resides in Los Angeles County. Plaintiff
is informed and believes that Brown does business in this judicial district by
promoting and/or selling products that infringe Plaintiffs trademark in this judicial
district.
BACKGROUND FACTS
9
10
7.
11
12
artistic name and he uses this name exclusively on his artwork. In addition,
13
Khazraei has used his trademark on his artwork, clothing, as well as in other
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
8.
22
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on March 3, 2008, and has continuously
23
used the mark since that time. On March 31, 2009, the USPTO issued to Plaintiff
24
25
9.
26
27
KONFUSED with respect to validity, ownership, and exclusive rights to use the
28
10.
clothing apparel.
11.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
12.
Brown has used his media presence to promote his use of Khazraeis
23
KONFUSED mark. In addition, Brown has now taken to using the term
24
25
where Khazraei is informed and believes that Brown has in excess of 80 million
26
followers.
27
28
-4COMPLAINT
13.
Facebook page to promote his Breezy clothing line which contains infringing uses
of Khazraeis mark.
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
-5COMPLAINT
14.
Brown also promoted his use of Khazraeis mark during his concert
tours. The following is an example of Brown wearing a hat with the infringing
mark:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
15.
Brown now uses the mark on his artwork in the same manner as
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-6COMPLAINT
16.
mark and Browns infringing use of that mark. In addition, based on Browns
reverse confusion.
7
8
Complaint.
18.
9
10
11
12
13
merchandise and brand throughout the United States in a manner that constitutes
14
15
16
17
consisting of, among other things, diminution in the value of and goodwill
18
19
20
21
22
sales.
23
22.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that the
24
25
26
27
28
-7COMPLAINT
3
4
Complaint.
24.
clothing apparel, artwork, social media and to promote himself and the same
10
1125(a).
25.
11
12
13
14
15
enjoined, Plaintiff will continue to suffer irreparable harm and damage to its
16
17
18
19
20
sales.
21
28.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that the
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-8COMPLAINT
3
4
5
29.
Complaint.
30.
clothing apparel, artwork, social media and to promote himself and the same
constitute trademark infringement under the common law of the State of California.
10
11
12
31.
13
14
enjoined, Plaintiff will continue to suffer irreparable harm and damage to its
15
16
17
18
19
20
33.
Complaint.
34.
21
22
23
clothing apparel, artwork, social media and to promote himself and the same
24
constitute unfair competition and an unfair and unlawful business act in violation of
25
26
35.
27
28
1
2
(1)
A permanent injunction;
(2)
Compensatory damages;
(3)
Restitutionary damages;
(4)
7
8
9
10
Defendants profits;
(6)
11
U.S.C. 1117 to the extent Defendants conduct was willful, intentional, and
12
13
(7)
14
(8)
15
(9)
For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.
16
17
18
By
19
Sean M. Kneafsey
Attorneys for Plaintiff ANDRE KHAZRAEI
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 10 COMPLAINT
1
2
3
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury of any issue triable by right of a jury
pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
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
-11DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL