`
`LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
`DANIEL C. DECARLO, SB# 160307
` E-Mail: Dan.DeCarlo@lewisbrisbois.com
`ESTHER Y. SHIN, SB# 324049
` E-Mail: Esther.Shin@lewisbrisbois.com
`633 West 5th Street, Suite 4000
`Los Angeles, California 90071
`Telephone: 213.250.1800
`Facsimile: 213.250.7900
`Attorneys for Defendant Wag Labs, Inc.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`WAG HOTELS, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`WAG LABS, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation, and DOES 1-20 inclusive,
`Defendant.
`
`CASE NO.
`DEFENDANT WAG LABS, INC.’S
`NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO THE
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT
`COURT FOR THE NORTHERN
`DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331,
`1367, AND 1446
`
`Date Filed: December 26, 2019
`
`TO THE CLERK OF THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT:
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant Wag Labs, Inc. (“Defendant”), by
`their counsel Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, hereby remove to this court,
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367, and 1446, based on federal question
`jurisdiction and supplemental jurisdiction, the claims pending as Case No.
`19CV360764 of the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara. In support
`of this removal, Defendant states as follows:
`I.
`THE REMOVED CASE
`1.
`The removed case is a civil action commenced in the Superior Court of
`California, County of Santa Clara by Plaintiff Wag Hotels, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) against
`1
`4834-3608-1077.1
`DEFENDANT WAG LABS, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
`THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367, AND 1446
`
`1 2 3 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
`
`LEWIS
`BRISBOIS
`BISGAARD
`& SMITH LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`
`
`Case 5:20-cv-01326 Document 1 Filed 02/21/20 Page 2 of 4
`
`Defendant entitled Wag Hotels, Inc v. Wag Labs, Inc., Case No. 19CV360764 (the
`“State Action”).
`2.
`Plaintiff filed the State Action on December 26, 2019, asserting claims
`for violation of Lanham Act, cancellation of trademark, breach of contract, breach
`of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, California statutory unfair
`competition, and declaratory relief.
`II.
`PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
`3.
`Defendant has thirty (30) days from the date of service or receipt of a
`copy of the Complaint to remove a case. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). Defendant was
`served with a copy of the Complaint on January 24, 2020. This Notice of Removal
`is therefore timely filed.
`4.
`Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), venue for the purposes of removal
`only is proper in the Northern District of California because this district embraces
`the place in which the removed action has been pending. This Court embraces the
`County of Santa Clara pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 84(a).
`5.
`Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), a true and correct copy of this Notice
`of Removal will be filed with the Superior Court of California, County of Santa
`Clara promptly after filing of same in this Court.
`6.
`Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), written notice of filing of this Notice
`of Removal will be given to all adverse parties promptly after filing of same in this
`Court.
`If any question arises as to the propriety of the removal of this action,
`7.
`Defendant requests the opportunity to conduct discovery, brief any disputed issues
`and to present oral argument in favor of its position that this case is properly
`removable.
`Noting in this Notice of Removal shall be interpreted as a waiver or
`8.
`relinquishment of Defendant’s rights to assert any defense or affirmative claims
`against Plaintiff.
`2
`4834-3608-1077.1
`DEFENDANT WAG LABS, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
`THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367, AND 1446
`
`1 2 3 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
`
`LEWIS
`BRISBOIS
`BISGAARD
`& SMITH LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`
`
`Case 5:20-cv-01326 Document 1 Filed 02/21/20 Page 3 of 4
`
`III. THE COURT HAS FEDERAL QUESTION JURISDICTION
`A. Plaintiff Asserts a Claim Arising Under the Laws of the United States
`9.
`The Court has original jurisdiction over this case. Federal question
`jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. section 1331 because Plaintiff has asserted a
`claim “arising under the…laws…of the United States.”
`10.
`The case may be removed to this Court by Defendant pursuant to 28
`U.S.C. section 1441(c) because it is a civil action over which the District Court has
`original jurisdiction founded on claims arising under the laws of the United States.
`11.
`There is federal question jurisdiction because Plaintiff asserts a claim
`for relief under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114, and 15 U.S.C. §§ 1119, 1064.
`12. Because at least one of the claims in the Complaint involves the
`resolution of a substantial, disputed federal question under the Lanham Act, the case
`is removable to this Court.
`B. The Court Has Supplemental Jurisdiction Over Any Non Federal
`Claims
`Supplemental jurisdiction exists as to all other claims pled in the
`13.
`Complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
`14.
`The Court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction “over all other
`claims that are so related to claims within such original jurisdiction that they form
`part of the same case or controversy.” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). This standard is
`satisfied here. All of Plaintiff’s state law claims are based on the same factual
`allegations supporting its federal Lanham Act claim. Those claims are so related to
`the Lanham Act claims (as to which there is federal question jurisdiction) that they
`form part of the same case or controversy about the Defendant’s purported
`infringement of Plaintiff’s alleged trademark.
`15.
`There is a significant interest in having these and other federal issues
`adjudicated in a federal forum, and removal of this action will not disrupt any
`balance between federal and state judicial responsibilities over related disputes.
`3
`4834-3608-1077.1
`DEFENDANT WAG LABS, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
`THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367, AND 1446
`
`1 2 3 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
`
`LEWIS
`BRISBOIS
`BISGAARD
`& SMITH LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`
`
`Case 5:20-cv-01326 Document 1 Filed 02/21/20 Page 4 of 4
`
`16. Accordingly, to the extent necessary, this Court has supplemental
`jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
`IV. CONCLUSION
`17.
`For the reasons set forth above, Defendant removes the above-
`referenced action pending in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara
`(Case No. 19CV360764) to the United States District Court for the Northern District
`of California.
`
`DATED: February 21, 2020
`
`DANIEL C. DECARLO
`ESTHER Y. SHIN
`LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
`
`By:
`
`/S/ DANIEL C. DECARLO
`Daniel C. DeCarlo
`Attorneys for Defendant Wag Labs, Inc.
`
`4
`4834-3608-1077.1
`DEFENDANT WAG LABS, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
`THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367, AND 1446
`
`1 2 3 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
`
`LEWIS
`BRISBOIS
`BISGAARD
`& SMITH LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`