Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:1

Similar documents
Case 1:17-cv VAC-CJB Document 1 Filed 12/19/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:13-cv JTN Doc #1 Filed 08/15/13 Page 1 of 19 Page ID#1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Case: 1:17-cv JG Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/31/17 1 of 36. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT I NO. Attorney General, and Mitchell A. Riese, Assistant Attorney General, files this action against

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/12/ :31 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/12/2016

Case 2:17-cv RSL Document 1 Filed 11/29/17 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

U.S. DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT Co RT FILED

Case 4:13-cv Document 5 Filed in TXSD on 05/13/13 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. Case No. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Case 1:15-cv LMB-IDD Document 136 Filed 07/05/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID# 2183

YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to Answer the Complaint in this action,

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY STATE OF MISSOURI

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/15/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 3:18-cv FAB Document 1 Filed 10/23/18 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO CIVIL NO.

1 Buy Miles Campaign with up to 50% Bonus Miles. Terms and Conditions

Case 1:17-cv CMA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2017 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA L- +: i DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D. C.

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 05/02/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1

FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 12/24/ :13 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/24/2016

Case 2:14-cv JCM-PAL Document 20 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

APPENDIX C-1 [COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND MANDAMUS RELIEF]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Attorneys for Plaintiffs IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No.: CV HRL

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VACAVILLE ADDING CHAPTER 9

Courthouse News Service

Case 3:08-cv JSW Document 1 Filed 07/17/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

CONSOLIDATED GROUP (NON-MEC GROUP) TSA USER AGREEMENT. Dated PERSON SPECIFIED IN THE ORDER FORM (OVERLEAF)

(Japanese Note) Excellency,

ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL OF VILLAGES OF VILANO HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC.

CHARTER SIGNATURE SCHOOL

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

Terms and Conditions applicable to Travel Agencies registered at volaris.com

Provided by: UKM-KS. Valid as of February 2018

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 24

Case 1:16-cv JL Document 10 Filed 10/21/16 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

CODE OF CONDUCT. Corporate Compliance 10.9 Effective: 12/17/13 Reviewed: 1/04/17 Revised: 1/04/17

Chapter 326. Unclaimed Moneys Act Certified on: / /20.

Decision ADJUDICATOR DECISION ZA DECISION DATE: 15 July timbavatigamereserve.co.za THE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRANT:

1. General Provisions 1. Parties. These Terms & Conditions regulate the legal relationship between us, Skypicker.com s.r.o., ID No.

AGENCY AGREEMENT. The definitions used in this agreement have the same meaning as those used in the ATOL Regulations 2012.

SADDLE CREEK ENTRANCE (PRIVACY) GATE OPERATING AGREEMENT BETWEEN SADDLE CREEK COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND CASTLE & COOKE CALIFORNIA, INC

4:11-cv RBH Date Filed 05/27/11 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

Attorney for Derrek Skinner, Pedro Hernandez and Jeanne Walker IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION

PLEASE READ CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THE Qantas Cash App

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 11/07/17 Page 2 of 12

BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

Case 1:13-cv DPW Document 1 Filed 08/08/13 Page 1 of 13 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. CHAPTER No Unclaimed Moneys. GENERAL ANNOTATION.

2013 SEABOURN SEABOURN 25 TH ANNIVERSARY SWEEPSTAKES

STATE OF VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION COMPLAINT. Defendant, the Wildflower Inn a/k/a DOR Associates LLP (the Wildflower Inn ), for nominal

BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

(No ) (Approved December 16, 2011) AN ACT

Member Benefits Special Offer

5-9 April 2018 Palacio de Congresos, Ferias y Exposiciones Marbella, Spain. Application 2018 EXHIBITORS.

Public Hearing: Tabled

EXHIBIT C. GROUND TRANSPORTATION OPERATING RULES & REGULATIONS Dated August 28, Section 1 Introduction

DISTRICT COURT CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA CASE NO.: DEPT NO.: VERIFIED COMPLAINT

GROUND TRANSPORTATION RULES AND REGULATIONS MONTROSE REGIONAL AIRPORT. Montrose, Colorado

COMAIR CATERING (PTY) LIMITED

2018 TRUE PENTICTON PHOTO CONTEST

Supplement No. 17 published with Gazette No. 22 dated 25 October, THE AIR NAVIGATION (OVERSEAS TERRITORIES) ORDER 2007, S.I No.

PART III ALTERNATIVE TRADING SYSTEM (SPA)

Case 1:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/11/19 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Wisconsin PTA Convention Exhibitor/Vendor Opportunities

Anti-Bribery and Corruption

Case 1:14-cv NLH-AMD Document 1 Filed 04/09/14 Page 1 of 58 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

AC 91-37A Truth in Leasing

TITLE 20 AERONAUTICS

Case 4:15-cv DMR Document 1 Filed 10/02/15 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Rules and Regulations 2013 Win a trip for two to Igloofest in Montréal!

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

Exhibitor Information

PROPOSED REGULATION OF JCAR CONSUMER PROTECTION

AGREEMENT BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA FOR AIR SERVICES

Case 3:18-cv DRD Document Filed 09/04/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) INTRODUCTION

GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR ONLINE TICKETING

The Amusement Ride Safety Act

COABE 2016 National Conference

LEEDS CITY REGION Sponsorship opportunities MIPIM UK 2018 and MIPIM 2019 Sponsorship opportunities

Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy

Sponsorship and exhibition prospectus

Case 3:16-cv SI Document 29 Filed 09/26/16 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND DECREE QUIETING TITLE

AIRPORT ACCESS PERMIT # FOR ON-DEMAND TAXICAB SERVICES AT MINETA SAN JOSE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BETWEEN AND THE CITY OF SAN JOSE

No entries will be accepted outside this time.

to enter required details (such as name, address, password, service category, locations covered) on the Hitched Platform s online form;

CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action

Prices shown are in U.S. dollars based on rates in effect at the time of booking and are subject to change without notice.

AIRPORT SPONSORSHIP POLICY

Time Watch Investments Limited

Transcription:

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION TORY BURCH LLC; RIVER LIGHT V, L.P., v. Plaintiffs, DOES 1-100 d/b/a the aliases identified on Schedule A, Defendants. Case No. 12-cv-7163 COMPLAINT Plaintiffs Tory Burch LLC and River Light V, L.P., (collectively, Plaintiffs or Tory Burch hereby bring the present action against Defendants DOES 1-100 identified on Schedule A attached hereto (collectively, Defendants, and allege as follows: I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the claims in this action pursuant to the provisions of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq., 28 U.S.C. 1338(a and (b, and 28 U.S.C. 1331. This Court has jurisdiction over the claims in this action that arise under the laws of the State of Illinois pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a, because the state law claims are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common nucleus of operative facts. 2. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391, and this Court may properly exercise personal jurisdiction over Defendants since each of the Defendants directly

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 2 of 14 PageID #:2 targets business activities toward consumers in Illinois and causes harm to Tory Burch s business within this Judicial District. Through at least the fully interactive commercial Internet websites operating under the Defendant Domain Names and/or the Online Marketplace Accounts identified in Schedule A attached hereto (collectively, Defendant Internet Stores, each of the Defendants has targeted and solicited sales from Illinois residents by operating online stores that offer shipping to Illinois, accept payment in U.S. dollars and, on information and belief, has sold counterfeit Tory Burch products to residents of Illinois. Each of the Defendants is committing tortious acts in Illinois, is engaging in interstate commerce, and has wrongfully caused Tory Burch substantial injury in the State of Illinois. II. INTRODUCTION 3. This action is substantially similar to previous actions filed by Tory Burch and other luxury good brands, and has been filed to combat the rampant sale of counterfeit merchandise on the Internet by anonymous individuals located abroad. In the present case, the Defendant Internet Stores trade upon Tory Burch s reputation and goodwill by selling and/or offering for sale unlicensed and counterfeit products featuring Tory Burch s federally-registered trademarks. See Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Does 1-100, No. 1:12-cv-04316 (N.D. Ill. June 26, 2012; Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Does 1-1,281, No. 1:12-cv-01973 (N.D. Ill. June 29, 2012; Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Does 1-100, No. 1:12-cv-00377 (N.D. Ill. May 22, 2012; Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Does 1-101, No. 1:11-cv-07970 (N.D. Ill. May 22, 2011; and Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Does 1-55, No. 1:11-cv-00010 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 14, 2011; see also Tory Burch, LLC v. Yong Sheng Int l Trade Co., Ltd., No. 1:10-cv-09336-DAB (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2011 (unpublished. Tory Burch has been and continues to be irreparably damaged through consumer 2

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 3 of 14 PageID #:3 confusion, dilution, and tarnishment of its valuable TORY BURCH Trademarks (as defined below as a result of Defendants actions and seeks injunctive and monetary relief. III. THE PARTIES Plaintiff 4. Plaintiff Tory Burch is famous throughout the United States and elsewhere as a source of attainable luxury footwear, handbags, accessories, clothing and other products for women of all ages, including the iconic REVA ballerina-style flats, which bear Tory Burch s famous ( TT mark. Tory Burch s products are distributed and sold to consumers through a worldwide network of authorized retailers, distributors, and licensees, including highend department and specialty stores; its own Tory Burch boutiques, and online. In Illinois, Tory Burch products are offered for sale at various stores including, Saks Fifth Avenue, Nordstrom. Bloomingdales, and a Tory Burch boutique located in Chicago s famous Magnificent Mile shopping district. 5. Since the brand s founding in 2004, Tory Burch has continuously sold products under both the TT and TORY BURCH trademarks and stylized variations thereof. Tory Burch has built substantial goodwill in the TT and TORY BURCH trademarks, and the brand is recognized worldwide as one of the most sought-after American fashion brands. The TT and TORY BURCH trademarks are famous and valuable assets of Tory Burch. 6. In addition to common law trademark rights, Tory Burch holds registrations for the marks TORY BURCH, REVA, and variations thereof in nearly 50 countries around the world (collectively, the TORY BURCH Trademarks. True and correct copies of a representative sampling of Tory Burch s United States Trademark Registrations are attached 3

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 4 of 14 PageID #:4 hereto as Exhibit 1. The registrations for the TORY BURCH Trademarks are valid and subsisting, and many are incontestable pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1065. 7. Tory Burch maintains strict standards for the quality of its products, and Tory Burch products are inspected and approved by Tory Burch or an agent of Tory Burch prior to distribution and sale. Consequently, consumers and potential consumers around the world associate the TORY BURCH Trademarks with footwear, handbags, apparel, accessories, and related products constructed from the highest-quality materials, style, and workmanship. The TORY BURCH Trademarks have achieved widespread fame, are widely accepted by the public, are enormously popular, and have become some of the most widely-recognized trademarks in the fashion industry. As such, the TORY BURCH Trademarks are famous marks. The Defendants 8. Defendants are individuals and business entities who, upon information and belief, reside in the People s Republic of China or other foreign jurisdictions. Defendants conduct business throughout the United States, including within the State of Illinois and this Judicial District, through the operation of the fully interactive commercial websites operating under the Defendant Internet Stores. Each Defendant targets Illinois residents and has offered to sell, and on information and belief, has sold and continues to sell his/her products to consumers within the State of Illinois. 9. On information and belief, Defendants are an interrelated group of counterfeiters acting in active concert or copying from each other and are knowingly and willfully manufacturing, importing, distributing, offering for sale and selling products bearing counterfeit versions of the TORY BURCH Trademarks to Illinois residents. Defendants are directly and personally contributing to, inducing, and engaging in the sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products 4

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 5 of 14 PageID #:5 as alleged herein and, on information and belief, oftentimes as partners, co-conspirators and/or suppliers in the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences. The counterfeit products for sale on the Defendant Internet Stores bear similar irregularities and indicia of being counterfeit, indicating that the counterfeit products were manufactured by and come from a common source and that Defendants are interrelated. In addition, the websites linked to Defendant Domain Names include multiple similarities, such as such as layout, text, payment methods, check-out features, website server and copyright-protected images copied from Tory Burch s <toryburch.com> website. 10. On information and belief, Defendants use multiple fictitious names and addresses to register the Defendant Internet Stores. Many of Defendants names and addresses used to register the Defendant Internet Stores are incomplete, contain randomly typed letters, or fail to include cities or states. With respect to the Defendant Domain Names, many Defendants use a privacy service that conceals the owners identity and contact information and many accounts are registered to the same alias. On information and belief, Defendants will continue to register new internet stores, using the identities listed in Schedule A, as well as other unknown fictitious names and addresses, for the purpose of selling counterfeit Tory Burch products unless, temporarily. preliminarily and permanently enjoined. However, Defendants use at least the aliases identified on Schedule A to conduct their businesses. IV. DEFENDANTS UNLAWFUL CONDUCT 11. Defendants engage in the offering for sale and the sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products bearing the TORY BURCH Trademarks within this Judicial District through multiple fully interactive commercial websites and Internet marketplace listings operating under at least the Defendant Internet Stores. Defendants, upon information and belief, also operate additional 5

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 6 of 14 PageID #:6 websites which promote and offer for sale counterfeit goods under domain names not yet known to Tory Burch. Defendants have purposefully directed their illegal activities toward the United States and consumers in the State of Illinois through the advertising, offering for sale, and sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products into this State. 12. Defendants, without any authorization or license from Tory Burch, have knowingly and willfully used and continue to use the TORY BURCH Trademarks in connection with the advertisement, offering for sale, and sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products into the United States and Illinois over the Internet. Each Defendant Internet Store offers shipping to Illinois residents and, on information and belief, Defendants have sold counterfeit Tory Burch products into Illinois. 13. Defendants facilitate sales by designing their websites and/or marketplace listings so that they appear to unknowing consumers to be authorized online retailers or outlet stores selling genuine Tory Burch products. All of the websites are sophisticated in appearance, accept payment in U.S. dollars, offering shipping to Illinois, and target consumers in Illinois and the United States. 14. Many of the Defendant Domain Names incorporate the TORY BURCH wordmark into the URL, and many include Tory Burch s copyright-protected images and product descriptions, making it very difficult for a consumer to distinguish such counterfeit sites from an authorized retailer. 15. On information and belief, the websites at the Defendant Internet Stores each accept payment via credit card and/or PayPal and ship the counterfeit products via the U.S. Postal Service in small quantities to minimize detection by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 6

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 7 of 14 PageID #:7 16. Defendants further perpetuate the illusion of legitimacy by offering live 24/7 customer service and using indicia of authenticity and security that consumers have come to associate with authorized retailers, including the McAfee Security, VeriSign, Visa, MasterCard and PayPal logos. 17. Defendants use of the TORY BURCH Trademarks in connection with the advertising, distribution, offering for sale and sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products, including the sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products into Illinois, is likely to cause and has caused confusion, mistake and deception by and among consumers and is irrevocably harming Tory Burch. COUNT I TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND COUNTERFEITING (15 U.S.C. 1114 18. Tory Burch re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 17. 19. This is a trademark infringement action against Defendants based on their unauthorized use in commerce of counterfeit imitations of the registered TORY BURCH Trademarks in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, and/or advertising of infringing goods. The TORY BURCH Trademarks are highly distinctive marks. Consumers have come to expect the highest quality from Tory Burch s products sold or marketed under the TORY BURCH Trademarks. 20. Tory Burch is the exclusive owner of the TORY BURCH Trademarks. Tory Burch s United States Trademark Registrations (Exhibit 1, as well as Tory Burch s International Trademark Registrations, are in full force and effect. 7

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 8 of 14 PageID #:8 21. Defendants have sold, offered to sell, marketed, distributed and advertised, and are still selling, offering to sell, marketing, distributing, and advertising products bearing counterfeit reproductions of the TORY BURCH Trademarks without Tory Burch s permission. 22. Upon information and belief, Defendants are willfully infringing have knowledge of Tory Burch s rights in the TORY BURCH Trademarks. Defendants unauthorized use of the TORY BURCH Trademarks is likely to cause and is causing confusion, mistake, and deception as to the origin and quality of the counterfeit goods among the general public. 23. Defendants illegal actions constitute trademark infringement and counterfeiting under Section 32 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1114. 24. Tory Burch has no adequate remedy at law, and if Defendants actions are not enjoined, Tory Burch will continue to suffer irreparable harm to its reputation and the goodwill of its well-known TORY BURCH Trademarks. 25. The injuries and damages sustained by Tory Burch have been directly and proximately caused by Defendants wrongful reproduction, use, advertisement, promotion, offering to sell, and sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products. COUNT II FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN (15 U.S.C. 1125(a 26. Tory Burch hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 25. 27. Defendants promotion, marketing, offering for sale and sale of counterfeit Tory Burch products has created and is creating a likelihood of confusion, mistake, and deception among the general public as to the affiliation, connection or association with Defendants or to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Defendants counterfeit Tory Burch products. 8

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 9 of 14 PageID #:9 28. By using the TORY BURCH Trademarks on the counterfeit products, Defendants create a false designation of origin and a misleading representation of fact as to the origin and/or sponsorship of the counterfeit products. 29. Defendants false designation of origin and misrepresentation of fact as to the origin and/or sponsorship of the counterfeit products to the general public is a violation of Section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125. 30. Tory Burch has no adequate remedy at law and, if Defendants actions are not enjoined, Tory Burch will continue to suffer irreparable harm to its reputation and the goodwill of its brand. COUNT III CLAIM FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE ANTICYBERSQUATTING CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT (15 U.S.C. 1125(d 31. Tory Burch hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 30. 32. Tory Burch is the exclusive owner of the TORY BURCH Trademarks. Tory Burch s United States Trademark Registrations (Exhibit 1, as well as Tory Burch s International Trademark Registrations, are in full force and effect. Additionally, the TORY BURCH Trademarks are famous marks pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1125 and were famous before and at the time of the registration of the Defendant Domain Names. 33. Upon information and belief, Defendants have acted with the bad faith intent to profit from the unauthorized use of the TORY BURCH Trademarks and the goodwill associated therewith by registering and using, and trafficking in various domain names which are identical to, confusingly similar to or dilutive of the TORY BURCH Trademarks. 9

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 10 of 14 PageID #:10 Trademarks. 34. Defendants have no intellectual property rights in or to any of the TORY BURCH 35. Defendants actions constitute cyberpiracy in violation of 43(d of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(d. 36. Tory Burch has no adequate remedy at law, and the registration and use of the Defendant Domain Names has caused, is causing, and is likely to continue to cause substantial and irreparable injury to the public and to Tory Burch. COUNT IV VIOLATION OF ILLINOIS UNIFORM DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT (815 ILCS 510, et seq. 37. Tory Burch hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 36. 38. Defendants have engaged in acts violating Illinois law including, but not limited to, passing off their products as those of Tory Burch, causing a likelihood of confusion and/or misunderstanding as to the source of their own goods, causing a likelihood of confusion and/or misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or association with Tory Burch s products, representing that their products have Tory Burch s approval when they do not, and engaging in other conduct which creates a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding among the public. 39. The foregoing Defendants acts constitute a violation of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, 815 Ill. Comp. Stat. 510, et seq. 40. Tory Burch has no adequate remedy at law, and Defendants conduct has caused Tory Burch to suffer damage to its reputation and goodwill. Unless enjoined by the Court, Tory Burch will suffer future irreparable harm as a direct result of Defendants unlawful activities. 10

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 11 of 14 PageID #:11 PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Tory Burch prays for judgment against Defendants as follows: 1 That Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, confederates, and all persons acting for, with, by, through, under or in active concert with them be temporarily, preliminarily and permanently enjoined and restrained from: a. using the TORY BURCH Trademarks or any reproductions, counterfeit copies or colorable imitations thereof in any manner in connection with the distribution, marketing, advertising, offering for sale, or sale of any product that is not a genuine Tory Burch product or is not authorized by Tory Burch to be sold in connection with the TORY BURCH Trademarks; b. passing off, inducing, or enabling others to sell or pass off any product as a genuine Tory Burch product or any other product produced by Tory Burch, that is not Tory Burch s product, or not produced under the authorization, control or supervision of Tory Burch and approved by Tory Burch for sale under the TORY BURCH Trademarks; c. committing any acts calculated to cause consumers to believe that Defendants products are those sold under the authorization, control or supervision of Tory Burch, or sponsored or approved by, or connected with Tory Burch; d. further infringing the TORY BURCH Trademarks and damaging Tory Burch s goodwill; e. otherwise competing unfairly with Tory Burch in any manner; f. shipping, delivering, holding for sale, transferring or otherwise moving, storing, distributing, returning, or otherwise disposing of, in any manner, products or 11

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 12 of 14 PageID #:12 inventory not manufactured by or for Tory Burch, nor authorized by Tory Burch to be sold or offered for sale, and which bear any of the TORY BURCH Trademarks or any reproductions, counterfeit copies or colorable imitations thereof; g. using, linking to, transferring, selling, exercising control over, or otherwise owning the Defendant Internet Stores or any other domain name or online marketplace account that is being used to sell counterfeit Tory Burch products; and h. operating and/or hosting websites at the Defendant Domain Names and any other domain names registered or operated by Defendants that are involved with the distribution, marketing, advertising, offering for sale, or sale of any product that is not a genuine Tory Burch product or not authorized by Tory Burch to be sold in connection with the TORY BURCH Trademarks; and 2 That Defendants, within fourteen (14 days after service of judgment with notice of entry thereof upon them, be required to file with the Court and serve upon Tory Burch a written report under oath setting forth in detail the manner in which Defendants have complied with paragraph 1, a through h, supra; 3 Entry of an Order that the domain names shall be changed from the current registrant to Tory Burch and that domain name registries for the Defendant Domain Names, namely VeriSign, Inc., Neustar, Inc., Afilias Limited and the Public Interest Registry, within five (5 business days of receipt of this Order, shall unlock and change the registrar of record for the Defendant Domain Names to a registrar of Tory Burch s selection until further ordered by this Court, and that the domain name registrars take any steps necessary to transfer the Defendant Domain Names to a registrar of Tory Burch s selection until further ordered by this Court; 12

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 13 of 14 PageID #:13 4 Entry of an Order that, upon Tory Burch s request, those in privity with Defendants and those with notice of the injunction, including any online marketplaces, Internet search engines, Web hosts, social media websites, domain-name registrars and domain name registries that are provided with notice of the injunction, cease facilitating access to any and all websites and accounts through which Defendants engage in the sale of counterfeit and infringing goods using the TORY BURCH Trademarks; 5 That Defendants account for and pay to Tory Burch all profits realized by Defendants by reason of Defendants unlawful acts herein alleged and that the amount of damages for infringement of the TORY BURCH Trademarks be increased by a sum not exceeding three times the amount thereof as provided by law; 6 In the alternative, that Tory Burch be awarded statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(c(2 of $2,000,000 for each and every use of any of the TORY BURCH Trademarks and $100,000 per domain name pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(d; 7 That Tory Burch be awarded its reasonable attorneys fees and costs; and 8 Award any and all other relief that this Court deems just and proper. 13

Case: 1:12-cv-07163 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/07/12 Page 14 of 14 PageID #:14 Dated this 7th day of September 2012. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Justin R. Gaudio Kevin W. Guynn Amy Ziegler Justin R. Gaudio Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. 300 South Wacker Drive Suite 2500 Chicago, Illinois 60606 312.360.0080 312.360.9315 (facsimile kguynn@gbclaw.net aziegler@gbclaw.net jgaudio@gbclaw.net 14