Matt's El Rancho Restaurant Lawsuit

Case 1:19-cv-00664-RP Document 1 Filed 06/28/19 Page 1 of 12
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
MATT’S EL RANCHO, INC.,
Plaintiff Civil Action No. _________________
v.
JURY DEMANDED
HORSESHOE HILL COWBOY CAFE,
LLC, GRADY SPEARS BR, LLC, and
GRADY SPEARS,
Defendants
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Matt’s El Rancho, Inc. submits this complaint for trademark
infringement, unfair competition, trademark dilution, and unjust enrichment.
I. The Parties
1. Matt’s El Rancho is a Texas corporation with an address of 2613 South
Lamar Boulevard, Austin, Texas 78704.
2. Defendant Horseshoe Hill Cowboy Cafe, LLC is a Texas limited liability
company with an address of 2730 Meadowbrook Drive, Fort Worth, Texas 76103.
3. Defendant Grady Spears BR, LLC is a Texas limited liability company
with an address of 204 West Exchange Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas 76164.
4. Defendant Grady Spears is an individual with an address of 204 West
Exchange Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas 76164. Mr. Spears is the owner and sole
1
manager of Defendant Grady Spears BR, LLC. He is the founder of the restaurant
Horseshoe Hill Café in Fort Worth, Texas, discussed below.
II. Jurisdiction & Venue
5. This complaint alleges trademark infringement and unfair competition
under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1125(a). The Court has subject-matter
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) and 15 U.S.C. § 1121(a).
6. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction to hear the state-law claims
under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
7. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), (b)(2), (c)(2), and (d).
III. Facts
Matt’s El Rancho and its BOB ARMSTRONG DIP Signature Appetizer
8. Matt’s El Rancho is a family-owned restaurant in Austin, Texas. Matt
Martinez and his wife Janie Martinez opened the restaurant in 1952, serving home-
cooked meals based on Janie’s recipes. Under their guidance, Matt’s El Rancho grew
to become one of the most iconic restaurants in Austin, with a loyal customer base.
The restaurant is famous for its welcoming atmosphere and Tex-Mex specialties.
9. Since at least 1986, Matt’s El Rancho has offered its signature cheese-
dip appetizer under the mark BOB ARMSTRONG DIP (the “Mark”).
10. The signature appetizer was created by Matt’s El Rancho for the famous
Texas politician Robert Landis Armstrong (commonly known as Bob Armstrong), who
was a frequent patron of Matt’s El Rancho. During one visit in the early 1970s, Bob
Armstrong asked the chef—Matt and Janie’s son, Matt Jr.—to make an appetizer
2
that was not on the menu. Matt Jr. improvised and created the BOB ARMSTRONG
DIP appetizer, which was an immediate hit. The signature appetizer has been on
Matt’s El Rancho’s permanent menu under the Mark ever since.
11. The screenshot below shows an example of how Matt’s El Rancho uses
the Mark in connection with its signature appetizer:
3
Matt’s El Rancho’s Trademark Rights
12. Matt’s El Rancho has used the Mark in commerce in connection with the
restaurant’s signature appetizer continuously since at least November 1986.
13. The media has widely reported the story of the Mark and Matt’s El
Rancho’s signature appetizer, including in books, news articles, and television
segments.
14. Matt’s El Rancho has for years used the Mark to advertise and promote
its signature appetizer, both through traditional advertising and online. As a result,
the Mark has developed significant consumer goodwill and recognition.
15. The Mark is inherently distinctive of Matt’s El Rancho and its offerings.
16. Also, due to Matt’s El Rancho’s longstanding use and promotion of the
Mark, the Mark has become distinctive of Matt’s El Rancho and its offerings.
17. Matt’s El Rancho owns strong common law rights in the Mark.
18. The Mark is famous within the State of Texas. It is widely recognized by
the consuming public within Texas.
19. In addition to its common law rights in the Mark, Matt’s El Rancho owns
a registration for the Mark on the Principal Register of the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office (PTO). See U.S. Reg. No. 5,135,570. The registration covers “Dips;
cheese in the form of dips; snack dips, namely, cheese dips and queso dips” in Class
29 and claims November 1986 as the date of first use. A copy of the registration
certificate is attached as Exhibit 1.
4
Defendants’ Unlawful Activities
20. On information and belief, Defendants own and operate Horseshoe Hill
Café (https://www.horseshoehillcafe.com/), a restaurant in Fort Worth, Texas that
serves cowboy cooking and Tex-Mex.
21. On information and belief, sometime before February 2018, Defendants
began using the Mark as the name of an appetizer on Defendants’ menu. The
screenshot below shows an example of Defendants’ use of the Mark:
5
22. On information and belief, Defendants use the Mark on the same type
of goods as Matt’s El Rancho (i.e., a cheese-dip appetizer).
23. On information and belief, the parties target similar consumers and use
similar advertising media and channels.
24. On information and belief, Defendants adopted and began using the
Mark with full knowledge of Matt’s El Rancho and its rights.
25. Matt’s El Rancho began using the Mark long before Defendants began
their use.
26. Defendants’ use of the Mark began after the Mark had become famous
within the State of Texas.
27. Matt’s El Rancho did not authorize or permit Defendants’ use of the
Mark.
Matt’s El Rancho’s Cease-and-Desist Letters
28. In approximately February 2018, Matt’s El Rancho discovered
Defendants’ unauthorized use of the Mark.
29. Counsel for Matt’s El Rancho sent a cease-and-desist letter to
Defendants1 on March 9, 2018. The letter noted Matt’s El Rancho’s longstanding
trademark rights in the Mark and its federal registration. The letter requested that
Defendants stop using the Mark, providing some amicable options for Defendants to
address Matt’s El Rancho’s concerns. A copy of the letter is attached as Exhibit 2.
Counsel mailed this letter to Defendants’ physical restaurant location in Fort

1
Worth. Counsel also emailed it to the restaurant’s founder, Defendant Spears.
6
30. On March 15, 2018, counsel for Matt’s El Rancho spoke with Defendant
Spears by phone about the cease-and-desist letter. During the call, Spears verbally
agreed that Defendants’ restaurant would stop using the Mark, but when asked for a
timeframe, he refused to give one.
31. Defendants did not honor this verbal agreement to stop using the Mark.
Defendants’ online menu still uses the Mark in connection with an appetizer, as
shown above. On information and belief, the Mark also remains on Defendants’
physical menus and may appear elsewhere in Defendants’ marketing materials.
32. On May 15, 2019, counsel for Matt’s El Rancho sent a follow-up letter.
The follow-up letter demanded that Defendants honor the verbal agreement from
March 15, 2018 and “immediately and permanently stop using the Mark.” A copy of
this follow-up letter is attached as Exhibit 3. Defendants did not respond.
33. On June 10, 2019, one of Matt’s El Rancho’s owners emailed Defendant
Spears personally, asking him again to stop using the Mark. Spears did not respond.
Effects of Defendants’ Unlawful Activities
34. Defendants’ unauthorized use of the Mark is likely to cause confusion,
to cause mistake, or to deceive customers and potential customers. Consumers and
potential consumers will likely perceive some connection between Defendants and
Matt’s El Rancho as to source, sponsorship, or affiliation, even though no such
connection exists.
35. Defendants’ actions falsely designate the origin of their goods and falsely
describe or represent facts with respect to those goods.
7
36. Defendants’ actions enable them to trade off and receive the benefit of
the goodwill built up by Matt’s El Rancho over decades of continuous and exclusive
use of the Mark.
37. Defendants’ actions effectively remove from Matt’s El Rancho the ability
to control the quality of the goods offered under the Mark. This places Matt’s El
Rancho’s reputation and goodwill at least partially in the hands of Defendants, whose
goods Matt’s El Rancho cannot control.
38. Defendants’ actions are likely to dilute the distinctiveness of the famous
Mark within Texas.
39. Defendants’ actions have caused them to become unjustly enriched at
the expense of Matt’s El Rancho.
IV. Causes of Action
Count 1: Federal Trademark Infringement

Under 15 U.S.C. § 1114
40. Matt’s El Rancho incorporates and re-asserts the paragraphs above.
41. Matt’s El Rancho owns protectable, federally registered rights in the
Mark.
42. Matt’s El Rancho has priority over Defendants.
to cause mistake, or to deceive.
44. Defendants have thus infringed Matt’s El Rancho’s registered
trademark rights in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114.
8
Count 2: Federal Unfair Competition

Under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)
46. Matt’s El Rancho owns protectable federal trademark rights in the
Mark.
49. Defendants have thus infringed Matt’s El Rancho’s trademark rights in
violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
Count 3: Texas Common Law Trademark Infringement &

Unfair Competition
51. Matt’s El Rancho owns protectable state common law trademark rights
in the Mark.
54. Defendants have thus infringed Matt’s El Rancho’s trademark rights
and committed unfair competition under Texas common law.
Count 4: Texas Statutory Trademark Dilution
56. Defendants’ actions are likely to cause dilution of the famous Mark
within the State of Texas.
9
57. The Mark became famous within the State of Texas before Defendants’
unauthorized use began.
58. Defendants are thus liable for Texas trademark dilution in violation of
Texas Business and Commerce Code section 16.103.
Count 5: Texas Common Law Unjust Enrichment
60. Defendants’ actions have unjustly enriched Defendants at the expense
of Matt’s El Rancho.
61. By using the Mark without authorization, Defendants have obtained a
benefit to which they are not entitled.
62. Defendants are thus liable for unjust enrichment under Texas common
law.
V. Willfulness of Defendants’ Violations
63. With respect to each cause of action above, Defendants’ violations are
and have been willful.
64. Defendants adopted the Mark with full knowledge of Matt’s El Rancho
and its identical Mark.
65. Defendants have continued using the Mark after receiving notice from
Matt’s El Rancho that their unauthorized use violates Matt’s El Rancho’s rights.
Defendants have also continued using the Mark after and despite Defendant Spears’
verbal agreement to stop using the Mark.
10
VI. Damages; Profits; Injunctive Relief
66. Matt’s El Rancho has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed
by Defendants’ unlawful actions described above.
67. Matt’s El Rancho is entitled to money damages. However, money
damages cannot fully compensate Matt’s El Rancho for the harm it has suffered and
continues to suffer. Matt’s El Rancho is entitled to an injunction to remedy this
ongoing and irreparable harm.
VII. Prayer
Matt’s El Rancho asks the Court to:
A. enter judgment for Matt’s El Rancho on all of its claims;
B. preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants from using the mark

BOB ARMSTRONG DIP and any other confusingly similar marks;
C. award Matt’s El Rancho all monetary remedies to which it is entitled

under federal and Texas law, including all profits realized by
Defendants (adjusted upward as the Court deems just), all damages
(trebled) sustained by Matt’s El Rancho, exemplary damages, and
nominal damages;
D. order the seizure and destruction of all items and materials in

Defendants’ possession, custody, or control that use the mark BOB
ARMSTRONG DIP or any other confusingly similar mark;
E. award Matt’s El Rancho its costs and reasonable attorney’s fees; and
F. award any other relief the Court deems just and proper.
VIII. Jury Demand
Matt’s El Rancho demands a jury on all issues triable by a jury.
11
DATED: June 28, 2019 Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Travis R. Wimberly

Travis R. Wimberly
State Bar No. 24075292
Elizabeth Stafki
State Bar No. 24086835
PIRKEY BARBER PLLC
1801 East 6th Street, Suite 300
Austin, TX 78702
(512) 322-5200
(512) 322-5201 (fax)
twimberly@pirkeybarber.com
estafki@pirkeybarber.com
Counsel for Plaintiff Matt’s El Rancho, Inc.
12
Case 1:19-cv-00664-RP Document 1-1 Filed 06/28/19 Page 1 of 2
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Travis R. Wimberly
600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2120
Austin, Texas 78701
March 9, 2018
VIA EMAIL & FEDEX: GRADY@HORSESHOEHILLCAFE.COM
Horseshoe Hill Cafe

204 W. Exchange Ave.
Fort Worth, TX 76164
Re: Use of the BOB ARMSTRONG DIP Trademark (Our Ref. MATT008)
Dear Sir or Madam:
This law firm represents Matt’s El Rancho, Inc. (“Matt’s”) in trademark and unfair-
competition matters. We write regarding the use of our client’s trademark BOB
ARMSTRONG DIP (the “Mark”) by your restaurant, Horseshoe Hill Cafe.
Since at least as early as 1986, Matt’s has used the Mark in connection with its
restaurant’s signature appetizer. The recipe for this appetizer was created at Matt’s
restaurant decades ago by Matt Martinez Jr. Matt’s named the appetizer in honor of
former Texas statesman Bob Armstrong.
Over the years, Matt’s use of the Mark and the unique history of its signature
appetizer have received extensive national media coverage and consumer recognition.
For example, Bon Appétit last year published the recipe and wrote that BOB
ARMSTRONG DIP is the “signature dish at Matt’s El Rancho.” Examples of this
national media coverage about Matt’s use of the Mark are attached as Exhibit A.
As the result of its years of continuous use and widespread consumer recognition,
Matt’s has developed strong common law rights and significant goodwill in the Mark.
Also, Matt’s owns a federal registration for the mark. U.S. Reg. No. 5,135,570. A copy
of the registration certificate, listing Matt’s as the owner, is attached as Exhibit B.
The goodwill associated with the Mark is extremely valuable and important to Matt’s.
Accordingly, Matt’s cannot permit others to use the Mark (or any confusingly similar
mark) in a manner likely to confuse consumers.
Having said that, it has come to our attention that Horseshoe Hill Cafe is currently
using the Mark without Matt’s authorization in connection with an appetizer. Given
the strong consumer association between Matt’s and the Mark, our client is concerned
512.322.5200 Fax: 512.322.5201 600 Congress Avenue Suite 2120 Austin, Texas 78701 www.pirkeybarber.com
that consumers encountering Horseshoe Hill Cafe’s use of the Mark will inevitably
assume some connection or affiliation with Matt’s.
While Matt’s is prepared to take legal action necessary to protect its Mark and
prevent consumer confusion, it would greatly prefer to resolve this matter amicably
and without significant disruption to your business. To that end, Matt’s will consider
this matter resolved if you will agree (a) to phase out all use of the Mark within 60
days from the date of this letter; and (b) to permanently refrain from using the Mark
or any confusingly similar mark in the future without Matt’s prior authorization.
Alternatively, if you would prefer to continue using the Mark, please let us know and
Matt’s will consider granting Horseshoe Hill Cafe an appropriate trademark license.
We ask that you provide your response within 10 days of the date of the letter. Please
call or email me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Travis R. Wimberly
2
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Reg. No. 5,135,570 Matt's El Rancho, Inc. (TEXAS CORPORATION)

2613 S. Lamar Blvd
Registered Feb. 07, 2017 Austin, TX 78704
CLASS 29: Dips; cheese in the form of dips; snack dips, namely, cheese dips and queso dips
Int. Cl.: 29
FIRST USE 11-00-1986; IN COMMERCE 11-00-1986
Trademark
THE MARK CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY
Principal Register PARTICULAR FONT STYLE, SIZE OR COLOR
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use the following apart from the mark as shown:
"DIP"
The name(s), portrait(s), and/or signature(s) shown in the mark does not identify a particular
living individual.
SER. NO. 86-853,705, FILED 12-18-2015

DAVID T MURRAY, EXAMINING ATTORNEY
REQUIREMENTS TO MAINTAIN YOUR FEDERAL TRADEMARK REGISTRATION
WARNING: YOUR REGISTRATION WILL BE CANCELLED IF YOU DO NOT FILE THE

DOCUMENTS BELOW DURING THE SPECIFIED TIME PERIODS.
Requirements in the First Ten Years*

What and When to File:
First Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) between the 5th and 6th
years after the registration date. See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 1141k. If the declaration is accepted, the
registration will continue in force for the remainder of the ten-year period, calculated from the registration
date, unless cancelled by an order of the Commissioner for Trademarks or a federal court.
Second Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application
for Renewal between the 9th and 10th years after the registration date.* See 15 U.S.C. §1059.
Requirements in Successive Ten-Year Periods*

What and When to File:
You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application for Renewal
between every 9th and 10th-year period, calculated from the registration date.*
Grace Period Filings*
The above documents will be accepted as timely if filed within six months after the deadlines listed above with
the payment of an additional fee.
*ATTENTION MADRID PROTOCOL REGISTRANTS: The holder of an international registration with an

extension of protection to the United States under the Madrid Protocol must timely file the Declarations of Use
(or Excusable Nonuse) referenced above directly with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
The time periods for filing are based on the U.S. registration date (not the international registration date). The
deadlines and grace periods for the Declarations of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) are identical to those for
nationally issued registrations. See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 1141k. However, owners of international registrations
do not file renewal applications at the USPTO. Instead, the holder must file a renewal of the underlying
international registration at the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization, under
Article 7 of the Madrid Protocol, before the expiration of each ten-year term of protection, calculated from the
date of the international registration. See 15 U.S.C. §1141j. For more information and renewal forms for the
international registration, see http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/.
NOTE: Fees and requirements for maintaining registrations are subject to change. Please check the
USPTO website for further information. With the exception of renewal applications for registered
extensions of protection, you can file the registration maintenance documents referenced above online at h
ttp://www.uspto.gov.
NOTE: A courtesy e-mail reminder of USPTO maintenance filing deadlines will be sent to trademark
owners/holders who authorize e-mail communication and maintain a current e-mail address with the
USPTO. To ensure that e-mail is authorized and your address is current, please use the Trademark
Electronic Application System (TEAS) Correspondence Address and Change of Owner Address Forms
available at http://www.uspto.gov.
Page: 2 of 2 / RN # 5135570
Exhibit 3
Travis R. Wimberly, Member

600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2120
Austin, Texas 78701
May 15, 2019
VIA EMAIL & FEDEX: grady@horseshoehillcafe.com
Horseshoe Hill Café

204 W. Exchange Ave.
Fort Worth, TX 76164
Re: Follow Up Regarding Your Infringement of the BOB ARMSTRONG DIP Trademark
(Our Ref. MATT008)
Dear Mr. Spears:
We write on behalf of our client Matt’s El Rancho, Inc. to follow up on our letter from
March 9, 2018 (enclosed again for your convenience).
In our earlier letter, we noted that your restaurant Horseshoe Hill Café has been using
BOB ARMSTRONG DIP (the “Mark”) as the name for one of your menu items. We then
explained that Matt’s owns a federal registration for the Mark with the U.S. Patent &
Trademark Office, and that your unauthorized use of the Mark infringes those federally
registered rights.
After you received our letter, you and I spoke on the phone around March 15, 2018. You
said during that call that your use of the Mark was meant to honor the late Matt Martinez,
Jr., who was a close friend of yours. You also said, however, that you understood our
client’s legal obligation to protect its trademark rights, and you advised me that you
would remove the Mark from your menu and stop using it. When I asked you for a
timetable, you refused to give one, but you suggested it would take a week or two.
Fourteen months have since passed, and so far as we can tell, you have not followed
through on your commitment to stop using the Mark. The Mark remains on your online
menu under “Appetizers,” and presumably it appears on your physical menus too. See
https://www.horseshoehillcafe.com/menu (last visited May 9, 2019).
Our client is disappointed that you are not respecting their trademark rights. We
understand your desire to honor your good friend Matt Jr., but there are plenty of ways
to honor him without infringing a federally registered trademark. Like any other
trademark owner, our client has a legal obligation to prevent unauthorized uses of its
Mark. Unfortunately, the law does not make any exception for family friends.
Please understand that this is a serious legal matter. If you do not immediately and
permanently stop using the Mark and remove it from your menu, our client is prepared
to take formal legal action. If you force us to do so, we will seek all of the remedies
available, including but not limited to money damages, your profits, costs of court,
reasonable attorney fees, and a permanent injunction. See 15 U.S.C. §§ 1116, 1117(a).
Please contact me within 10 days of this letter’s date to advise whether you will comply
fully with these requests. If we do not hear from you by then, we intend to move forward
as discussed.
Sincerely,
Travis R. Wimberly
Enclosure
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Matt's El Rancho, Inc. Horseshoe Hill Cowboy Cafe, LLC, Grady Spears BR, LLC, and
Grady Spears
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Pirkey Barber PLLC, 1801 East 6th Street, Ste 300, Austin, TX 78701;
Tel: (512) 322-5200
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
u 1 U.S. Government u 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State u 1 u 1 Incorporated or Principal Place u 4 u 4
of Business In This State
u 2 U.S. Government u 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State u 2 u 2 Incorporated and Principal Place u 5 u 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a u 3 u 3 Foreign Nation u 6 u 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
u 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY u 625 Drug Related Seizure u 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 u 375 False Claims Act
u 120 Marine u 310 Airplane u 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 u 423 Withdrawal u 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
u 130 Miller Act u 315 Airplane Product Product Liability u 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
u 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability u 367 Health Care/ u 400 State Reapportionment
u 150 Recovery of Overpayment u 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS u 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury u 820 Copyrights u 430 Banks and Banking
u 151 Medicare Act u 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability u 830 Patent u 450 Commerce
u 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability u 368 Asbestos Personal u 835 Patent - Abbreviated u 460 Deportation
Student Loans u 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application u 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) u 345 Marine Product Liability u 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
u 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY u 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits u 350 Motor Vehicle u 370 Other Fraud u 710 Fair Labor Standards u 861 HIA (1395ff) u 490 Cable/Sat TV
u 160 Stockholders’ Suits u 355 Motor Vehicle u 371 Truth in Lending Act u 862 Black Lung (923) u 850 Securities/Commodities/
u 190 Other Contract Product Liability u 380 Other Personal u 720 Labor/Management u 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
u 195 Contract Product Liability u 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations u 864 SSID Title XVI u 890 Other Statutory Actions
u 196 Franchise Injury u 385 Property Damage u 740 Railway Labor Act u 865 RSI (405(g)) u 891 Agricultural Acts
u 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability u 751 Family and Medical u 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act u 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS u 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
u 210 Land Condemnation u 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: u 791 Employee Retirement u 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff u 896 Arbitration
u 220 Foreclosure u 441 Voting u 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) u 899 Administrative Procedure
u 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment u 442 Employment u 510 Motions to Vacate u 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of
u 240 Torts to Land u 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
u 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations u 530 General u 950 Constitutionality of
u 290 All Other Real Property u 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: u 462 Naturalization Application
u 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 540 Mandamus & Other u 465 Other Immigration
Other u 550 Civil Rights Actions
u 448 Education u 555 Prison Condition
u 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
u 1 Original u 2 Removed from u 3 Remanded from u 4 Reinstated or u 5 Transferred from u 6 Multidistrict u 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
15 USC 1051, et seq.
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Trademark infringement, unfair competition, trademark dilution, and unjust enrichment
VII. REQUESTED IN u CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: u Yes u No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
06/28/2019 /s/ Travis R. Wimberly
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17) Case 1:19-cv-00664-RP Document 1-4 Filed 06/28/19 Page 2 of 2
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.
VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.

Matt's El Rancho Restaurant Lawsuit

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Matt's El Rancho Restaurant Lawsuit

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Case 1:19-cv-00664-RP Document 1 Filed 06/28/19 Page 1 of 12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MATT’S EL RANCHO, INC.,

Plaintiff Civil Action No. _________________

Plaintiff Matt’s El Rancho, Inc. submits this complaint for trademark

infringement, unfair competition, trademark dilution, and unjust enrichment.

1. Matt’s El Rancho is a Texas corporation with an address of 2613 South

Lamar Boulevard, Austin, Texas 78704.

2. Defendant Horseshoe Hill Cowboy Cafe, LLC is a Texas limited liability

3. Defendant Grady Spears BR, LLC is a Texas limited liability company

4. Defendant Grady Spears is an individual with an address of 204 West

Horseshoe Hill Café in Fort Worth, Texas, discussed below.

II. Jurisdiction & Venue

5. This complaint alleges trademark infringement and unfair competition

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) and 15 U.S.C. § 1121(a).

6. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction to hear the state-law claims

under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).

7. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), (b)(2), (c)(2), and (d).

Matt’s El Rancho and its BOB ARMSTRONG DIP Signature Appetizer

8. Matt’s El Rancho is a family-owned restaurant in Austin, Texas. Matt

Matt’s El Rancho’s permanent menu under the Mark ever since.

the Mark in connection with its signature appetizer:

Matt’s El Rancho’s Trademark Rights

restaurant’s signature appetizer continuously since at least November 1986.

Rancho’s signature appetizer, including in books, news articles, and television

the Mark has developed significant consumer goodwill and recognition.

the consuming public within Texas.

certificate is attached as Exhibit 1.

Defendants’ Unlawful Activities

Café (https://www.horseshoehillcafe.com/), a restaurant in Fort Worth, Texas that

serves cowboy cooking and Tex-Mex.

21. On information and belief, sometime before February 2018, Defendants

screenshot below shows an example of Defendants’ use of the Mark:

of goods as Matt’s El Rancho (i.e., a cheese-dip appetizer).

similar advertising media and channels.

Mark with full knowledge of Matt’s El Rancho and its rights.

within the State of Texas.

Matt’s El Rancho’s Cease-and-Desist Letters

28. In approximately February 2018, Matt’s El Rancho discovered

Defendants’ unauthorized use of the Mark.

29. Counsel for Matt’s El Rancho sent a cease-and-desist letter to

Defendants1 on March 9, 2018. The letter noted Matt’s El Rancho’s longstanding

address Matt’s El Rancho’s concerns. A copy of the letter is attached as Exhibit 2.

Counsel mailed this letter to Defendants’ physical restaurant location in Fort

Worth. Counsel also emailed it to the restaurant’s founder, Defendant Spears.

timeframe, he refused to give one.

physical menus and may appear elsewhere in Defendants’ marketing materials.

this follow-up letter is attached as Exhibit 3. Defendants did not respond.

Effects of Defendants’ Unlawful Activities

34. Defendants’ unauthorized use of the Mark is likely to cause confusion,

to cause mistake, or to deceive customers and potential customers. Consumers and

Matt’s El Rancho as to source, sponsorship, or affiliation, even though no such

describe or represent facts with respect to those goods.

use of the Mark.

goods Matt’s El Rancho cannot control.

Mark within Texas.

39. Defendants’ actions have caused them to become unjustly enriched at

the expense of Matt’s El Rancho.

IV. Causes of Action

Count 1: Federal Trademark Infringement

40. Matt’s El Rancho incorporates and re-asserts the paragraphs above.

41. Matt’s El Rancho owns protectable, federally registered rights in the

42. Matt’s El Rancho has priority over Defendants.