Complaint for False Designation of Origin
United States District Court
Western District of Washington At Seattle
IDPoint, Ltd., a Washington corporation,
Plaintiff,
vs.
REED ELSEVIER INC., a foreign corporation, doing business as LexisNexis;
and AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION, foreign corporation,
Defendants.
|
No. 02-74044
COMPLAINT FOR FALSE
DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN
TRAIL BY JURY REQUESTED
|
Plaintiff IDPoint, Ltd. hereby alleges the following causes of action against
Defendants:
I. Parties
1. The Plaintiff, IDPoint, Ltd. is a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the State of Washington, having its principal place of business
in the City of Yelm, County of Pierce, State of Washington. IDPoint, Ltd. is
actively engaged in the business of developing, marketing, and servicing custom
and commercial software and hardware for use in business and commerce, particularly
for those businesses and agencies that have a need for and/or require extensive
identifying information collection, recall of such information, use of such
information, tracking of such information, disbursement of such information,
validation of such information, including validating information across multiple
databases and outside databases, cross-referencing such information, and recall
of such information.
2. Upon information and belief, Defendant Reed Elsevier Inc. is a corporation,
d/b/a LexisNexis, or is another other business entity of unknown structure and
organization, having its principal place of business in New York. Defendant
Reed Elsevier Inc. is qualified to do business and is doing business in the
State of Washington as LexisNexis.
3. The Defendant American Bankers Association is a corporation, or is another
business entity of unknown structure and organization, having its principal
place of business in Washington, D.C. Defendant is qualified to do business
and is doing business in the State of Washington.
II. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. This action arises under the trademark laws of the United States of America,
15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq. Original jurisdiction over False Designation of Origin
and/or Trademark Infringement and Federal Unfair Competition claims is conferred
upon this Court by 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338.
5. Defendants Reed Elsevier Inc. d/b/a LexisNexis and American Bankers Association
do business in this judicial district. Venue, therefore, is proper in this judicial
district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)-(c).
III. Facts
6. IDPoint, Ltd. is a Washington Corporation doing business in multiple States
of the United States. IDPoint, Ltd. has been in business since September 2000
and has extensive experience in the development, marketing, and servicing of
custom and commercial software and hardware products, especially to businesses
and governmental agencies, both state and federal, that have a need for and/or
require extensive identifying information collection, recall of such information,
use of such information, tracking of such information, appropriate disbursement
of such information, validation of information, including validating information
across multiple databases and outside databases, cross-referencing of such information,
and retention of such information. The information that is collected, managed
and verified by the custom and commercial software and hardware developed and
marketed by IDPoint, Ltd., includes but is not limited to names, addresses,
dates of birth, social security information and numbers, criminal records and
histories, credit reports and information, telephone numbers, account numbers,
biometric data including fingerprints, signatures, real property, sub-parts
of real property, photographic, video, and/or digital images, etc.
7. IDPoint, Ltd. coined the trademark IDPoint and first began
using the trademark IDPoint in commerce as early as September
2000.
8. IDPoint, Ltd. has promoted, marketed and sold products in various States
of the United States under the trademark IDPoint, continuously
since as early as September 2000. Further, IDPoint, Ltd, under the trademark
IDPoint has been actively promoting applications for its products
to businesses and governmental agencies, such as but not limited to, the gaming
industry, gaming regulatory agencies, pharmacies, power generating plants, agencies
with obvious homeland security applications, such as the Federal Aviation Administration,
the TSA, the Department of Homeland Security, and other businesses and agencies.
9. Defendants American Bankers Association and/or Reed Elsevier, Inc., d/b/a
Lexis/Nexis developed, upon information and belief, software substantially similar
in function to the custom and commercial software already being marketed by
IDPoint, Ltd. Further, Defendants American Bankers Association and Reed Elsevier,
Inc., d/b/a Lexis/Nexis announced with a press release on or about December
5, 2002 that their product was being marketed under the name of IDPoint.
10. Defendants American Bankers Association and/or Reed Elsevier, Inc., d/b/a
LexisNexis continue to market software substantially similar in function to
the custom and commercial software of IDPoint, Ltd., all under the trademark
IDPoint which is owned, used, marketed, and promoted by IDPoint,
Ltd.
11. Defendants American Bankers Association and/or Reed Elsevier, Inc., d/b/a
LexisNexis continue to market their software to businesses and agencies substantially
similar to those marketed, supplied, and serviced by IDPoint, Ltd., all under
trademark of IDPoint which is owned, used, marketed, and promoted
by IDPoint, Ltd.
12. Defendants American Bankers Association and/or Reed Elsevier, Inc., d/b/a
LexisNexis have infringed on the trademark IDPoint which is owned,
used, marketed, and promoted by IDPoint, Ltd.
13. The impact of Defendants American Bankers Association and Reed Elsevier
Inc., d/b/a LexisNexis trademark infringement is particularly acute in that
Defendants are in the same industry as and in direct competition for the same
or overlapping customer base as IDPoint, Ltd., and this has additionally caused
confusion in the marketplace.
14. Defendants use of the trademark IDPoint is unauthorized
and unlicensed by IDPoint, Ltd.
15. Defendants use of the trademark IDPoint allows the Defendants
to trade on the substantial brand recognition enjoyed by IDPoint, Ltd., and
to misdirect consumers from IDPoint, Ltd.s products and services to those
of Defendants. By so doing, Defendants have gained an improper and unfair competitive
advantage over IDPoint, Ltd. in the sale of, and marketing of, competing products
and services.
16. Upon information and belief, Defendants have at all relevant times been
aware or should have been aware of IDPoint, Ltd.s IDPoint
trademark.
17. The acts of Defendants have caused and will continue to cause serious
and irreparable harm to IDPoint, Ltd. and to the goodwill associated with IDPoint,
Ltd.s trademark. Moreover, Defendants have and will continue to unjustly
benefit - at IDPoint, Ltd.s expense - from gains, profits and advances
derived from the promotion and sale of products and services in association
with the IDPoint trademark, which is owned and used by IDPoint,
Ltd.
IV. CAUSE OF ACTION
FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN AND UNFAIR COMPETITION
18. Plaintiff IDPoint, Ltd. realleges paragraphs 1-17 of this complaint.
19. Defendants have engaged in false designation of origin by using a mark
identical to IDPoint, Ltd.s trademark IDPoint even though
IDPoint, Ltd. owns the exclusive rights to use the mark in association with
the products, services, and markets as described above. Defendants use of IDPoints
trademark IDPoint is without license, permission or authorization
and is likely to and has caused confusion or mistake as to the origin, sponsorship,
or approval of Defendants goods, services, or commercial activities.
Thus, Defendants actions constitute a violation of Section 43(a) of the
Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
20. Defendants have derived and will continue to derive and receive from
the above alleged acts of infringement, profits and revenues in an amount that
is not presently known to Plaintiff. Further, such acts of infringement were
made with knowledge of their capacity to deceive and were thus committed intentionally
and willfully. By reason of the above acts of infringement, Plaintiff has been
and will continue to be damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
21. The activities of Defendants as alleged in this Complaint have caused
and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Plaintiff.
Pray for Relief
WHEREFORE, IDPoint, Ltd. prays for the following alternative and cumulative
relief:
1. An order enjoining Defendants, including all officers, agents, affiliates,
employees and representative of the Defendants, and all persons in active concert
or participation with any of them, from engaging in or performing any of the
following:
- Using or displaying the mark IDPoint, or any other marks
confusingly similar thereto, as a service mark, trademark, trade name or part
thereof alone or in combination with other words, symbols, styles, titles,
or marks in connection with the advertising, marketing, sale or provision
of any products or services.
- Performing any act or using or displaying any words, names, or marks that
are likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake or to deceive, or otherwise
mislead the trade or public into believing that IDPoint, Ltd. and Defendants
are one and the same; that IDPoint, Ltd. and Defendants are in some way connected;
that IDPoint, Ltd. is the sponsor of Defendants or their products; that Defendants
are in some way affiliated with, associated with, or under the supervision
or control of IDPoint, Ltd., or that the products of Defendants originate
from or are approved by IDPoint, Ltd. or are likely in any way to lead the
public to associate Defendants with IDPoint, Ltd..
- Filing, maintaining, or prosecuting any application to register the mark
IDPoint, or any other mark confusingly similar thereto, or any
derivative, colorable imitation, or confusingly similar marks as corporate
names, trade names, trademarks, or service marks with any governmental agency;
and,
- Filing for, maintaining, or otherwise using any Internet Resource Locator
(URL) domain name incorporating in whole or in part the mark
IDPoint or any derivative, colorable imitation, or confusingly
similar mark thereto.
2. An order that Defendants deliver up for destruction all products, printed
material, stationery, business forms, signs, advertisements, brochures, promotional
material, manuals, pamphlets, labels, packages, containers, and all other materials
bearing the mark IDPoint, or any derivative, colorable imitation,
or confusingly similar mark, together with all means for making or reproducing
the same.
3. An order that Defendants immediately abandon or withdraw any application
to register the mark IDPoint, or any derivative, colorable imitation,
or confusingly similar mark as corporate names, trade names, trademarks, or
service marks with any governmental agency.
4. An order requiring Defendants to send a written notice to all recipients
of its mailings bearing the mark IDPoint, or any derivative, colorable
imitation, or confusingly similar mark, and to all persons who have viewed Defendants
Internet site, setting forth IDPoint, Ltd.s exclusive ownership of and
rights to its trademark and trade name and disavowing any relationship between
IDPoint and Defendants.
5. An order requiring Defendants to file with this Court and serve on IDPoint,
Ltd., within 30 days of service of this order, a report in writing under oath
setting forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendants have complied
with the terms of the ordered relief.
6. Damages in an amount sufficient to compensate IDPoint, Ltd. for all injury
sustained as a result of Defendants wrongful activities, and to account
for and pay over to IDPoint, Ltd. all gains, profits, and advances derived from
the use, promotion or sale by Defendants of any products or provision of any
services in wrongful association with the IDPoint trademark.
7. Treble the amount of damages recovered by IDPoint, Ltd. and all of its
litigation expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees and costs.
8. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just.
VIII. JURY DEMAND
IDPoint, Ltd. requests a jury trial on all issues triable by jury.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this the 28th day of February, 2003.
By: ROBERT A. ZIELKE, WSBA #21220
Attorney for Plaintiff
|