Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. httgj/estta.usQto.gov
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`91204105
`
`Defendant
`Jones, Brenda F.
`
`Michael J.Ga||agher, David J.Dawsey, and
`GALLAGHER & DAWSEY CO., LPA
`PO BOX 785
`COLUMBUS, OH 43216-0785
`
`trademarks@invention-protection.com
`
`Motion to Suspend for Civil Action
`
`David J Dawsey
`
`trademarks@invention-protection.com
`
`/David J Dawseyl
`04/1 7/2012
`
`20120417 Motion to suspend opposition (FUQU.007).pdf ( 6 pages )(26140
`bytes)
`Exhibit A — Docket Report for 1_11-cv-09274.pdf (4 pages )(38318 bytes)
`( 15 pages )(2436137 bytes )
`2 pages) 336932 bytes )
`2 pages) 197374 bytes )
`2 pages) 196557 bytes )
`2 pages) 23727 bytes )
`3 pages) 25734 bytes )
`2 pages) 26115 bytes )
`2 pages) 20069 bytes )
`2 pages) 268383 bytes )
`2 pages )(19749 bytes )
`2 pages )(58844 bytes )
`2 pages )(27873 bytes )
`16 pages )(74284 bytes)
`2 pages )(58600 bytes )
`2 pages )(20149 bytes )
`15 pages )(430506 bytes)
`
`B-17b2.pdf ( 30 pages )(953784 bytes )
`B—17c.pdf ( 15 pages )(813766 bytes )
`B-17c2.pdf ( 8 pages )(433544 bytes )
`B-17d.pdf ( 10 pages )(539682 bytes)
`B-17d2.pdf ( 18 pages )(1188266 bytes )
`B—18.pdf ( 3 pages )(28974 bytes )
`
`Proceeding
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`Attachments
`
`Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA467551
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`04/17/2012
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`91204105
`Defendant
`Jones, Brenda F.
`Michael J.Gallagher, David J.Dawsey, and
`GALLAGHER & DAWSEY CO., LPA
`PO BOX 785
`COLUMBUS, OH 43216-0785
`
`trademarks@invention-protection.com
`Motion to Suspend for Civil Action
`David J. Dawsey
`trademarks@invention-protection.com
`/David J. Dawsey/
`04/17/2012
`20120417 Motion to suspend opposition (FUQU.007).pdf ( 6 pages )(26140
`bytes )
`Exhibit A - Docket Report for 1_11-cv-09274.pdf ( 4 pages )(38318 bytes )
`B-1.pdf ( 15 pages )(2436137 bytes )
`B-2.pdf ( 2 pages )(336932 bytes )
`B-3.pdf ( 2 pages )(197374 bytes )
`B-4.pdf ( 2 pages )(196557 bytes )
`B-5.pdf ( 2 pages )(23727 bytes )
`B-6.pdf ( 3 pages )(25734 bytes )
`B-7.pdf ( 2 pages )(26115 bytes )
`B-8.pdf ( 2 pages )(20069 bytes )
`B-9.pdf ( 2 pages )(268383 bytes )
`B-10.pdf ( 2 pages )(19749 bytes )
`B-11.pdf ( 2 pages )(58844 bytes )
`B-12.pdf ( 2 pages )(27873 bytes )
`B-13.pdf ( 16 pages )(74284 bytes )
`B-14.pdf ( 2 pages )(58600 bytes )
`B-15.pdf ( 2 pages )(20149 bytes )
`B-16.pdf ( 15 pages )(430506 bytes )
`B-17a.pdf ( 23 pages )(239961 bytes )
`B-17b.pdf ( 25 pages )(904852 bytes )
`B-17b2.pdf ( 30 pages )(953784 bytes )
`B-17c.pdf ( 15 pages )(813766 bytes )
`B-17c2.pdf ( 8 pages )(433544 bytes )
`B-17d.pdf ( 10 pages )(539682 bytes )
`B-17d2.pdf ( 18 pages )(1188266 bytes )
`B-18.pdf ( 3 pages )(28974 bytes )
`
`

`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In the Matter of Application No.: 85/389,280
`For the Mark: SWERVE ON
`Date filed: August 4, 2011
`
`SWERVE IP LLC,
`
`Opposer,
`
`V.
`
`JONES, BRENDA F.
`
`Applicant.
`
`Opposition No. 91204105
`
`APPLICANT’S MOTION TO SUSPEND OPPOSITION PROCEEDING
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
`
`Applicant Brenda F. Jones submits this motion to suspend the opposition proceedings
`
`herein pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 2.117(a) and TBMP 510.02(a) in light of a civil action pending
`
`before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois, Eastern Division. See
`
`Applicant’s Exhibit A.
`
`“Whenever it comes to the attention of the Board that a party or parties to a case
`
`pending before it are involved in a civil action which may have a bearing on the Board case,
`
`proceedings before the Board may be suspended until final determination of the civil action.”
`
`TBMP 510.02(a). Here, the Opposer in the pending opposition is involved in a civil action that
`
`may have a bearing on the Board case. “Ordinarily, the Board will suspend proceedings in the
`
`case before it if the final determination of the other proceeding will have a bearing on the issues
`
`before the Board.” TBMP 510.02(a). Here, the outcome of Opposer's civil litigation will have a
`
`direct bearing upon the outcome of this opposition proceeding. Both proceedings involve the
`
`same registration and similar issues.
`
`1
`
`

`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`1.
`
`On August 4, 2011, Applicant filed a US trademark application (serial no.
`
`85/389,280) for the SWERVE ON mark in International Class 032 for “energy drinks.”
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`On November 29, 2011, the application was approved for publication.
`
`On January 3, 2012, the mark was published in the Trademark Official Gazette.
`
`On February 29, 2012, Opposer filed a Notice of Opposition citing their US
`
`registration for the SWERVE mark (US Reg. No. 3679639) in International Class 030 for
`
`“natural sweetener” as the basis for opposition.
`
`5.
`
`Previously on March 9, 2011, Opposer filed a Notice of Opposition (Opposition
`
`No. 91198921) citing the same registration as the basis for opposition of application serial
`
`number 85/153,870, filed by Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company, for the SWERVE mark in International
`
`Class 030 for “chewing gum.”
`
`6.
`
`On December 29, 2011, the Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company filed a civil action No. 11-
`
`cv-09274 in the United States District Court For The Northern District Of Illinois Eastern Division
`
`seeking a declaratory judgment that its use of SWERVE as mark for a sour tropical flavor
`
`indicator for its 5 brand of chewing gum does not infringe any trademark rights of Opposer
`
`including U.S. Trademark Registration No. 3,679,639 for SWERVE in class 30 for natural
`
`sweetener, or otherwise subject the Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company to liability under state
`
`and/common law unfair competition laws, including the laws of the State of Illinois. See
`
`Applicant’s Exhibit A for the Docket Report, and Applicant’s Exhibits B1-B18 for each individual
`
`docket entry.
`
`7.
`
`On March 2, 2012, Opposer filed an Answer with Counterclaims in the Illinois
`
`litigation, Exhibit B13, alleging trademark infringement under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. §§
`
`1114 and 1125); unfair competition under Illinois common law; and Unfair Competition under
`
`the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Businesses Act (815 ILCS 505, et seq.).
`
`2
`
`

`
`8.
`
`On March 28, 2012, Opposer filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction in the
`
`Illinois litigation, Exhibit B17.
`
`LEGAL ARGUMENT
`
`A. This Opposition Proceeding Should Be Suspended Because the Civil Action Will Have
`a “Bearing On” the Present Opposition
`
`This Board has the discretion to suspend its proceedings pending the final resolution of
`
`a civil action whereas here the outcome of the civil action “may have a bearing on” issues
`
`presented herein. 37 C.F.R. § 2.117(a). TBMP 510.02(a) (“Ordinarily, the Board will suspend
`
`proceedings in the case before it if the final determination of the other proceeding will have a
`
`bearing on the issues before the Board.”); Other Tel. Co. v. Connecticut Nat'l Tel. Co., 181
`
`U.S.P.Q. 125, 127 (T.T.A.B. 1974) (ruling for suspension when “the outcome of the civil action
`
`will have a bearing on the issues involved in the proceeding.” See also Kearns-Tribune, LLC v.
`
`Salt Lake Tribune Publishing Co., 2003 WL 22134916 at *3 (T.T.A.B. 2003) (“[s]uspension of a
`
`Board case is appropriate even if the civil case may not be dispositive of the Board case, so
`
`long as the ruling will have a bearing on the rights of the parties in the Board case.”); SoftBelly's
`
`Inc. v. Ty, Inc., 2002 WL 1844210 at *2 (T.T.A.B. 2002) (“[w]henever it shall come to the
`
`attention of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that a party or parties are engaged in a civil
`
`action … which may have a bearing on the case, proceedings before the Board may be
`
`suspended until termination of the civil action.”). Although these cases are not precedential, they
`
`are nevertheless persuasive examples of circumstances similar to those in this case in which
`
`the Board appropriately suspended its proceedings pending the outcome of separate civil
`
`actions.
`
`Here, issues presented in this Opposition Proceeding are also before the District Court.
`
`Specifically, the District Court will determine the likelihood of confusion issues unique to “natural
`
`3
`
`

`
`sweetener” products that may be used in, or on, virtually any consumable product. The
`
`resolution of such issues definitely will “have a bearing on the case” before the Board.
`
`In short, TTAB proceedings should be suspended whereas here a court will resolve
`
`issues that overlap with and therefore have a “bearing on” the resolution of issues before the
`
`TTAB. Whopper-Burger, Inc. v. Burger King Corp., 171 U.S.P.Q. 805, 807 (T.T.A.B. 1971).
`
`Accordingly, because the pending civil action “involves many of the issues … raised” before the
`
`Board, a suspension “can go a long way in resolving the problems relating to the issuance and
`
`existence of the registrations” at issue herein. Miller v. B&H Foods, Inc., 209 U.S.P.Q. 357, 359
`
`(T.T.A.B. 1981) (indicating that “under normal circumstances … it is the practice to suspend the
`
`proceeding before the Board to await the outcome of the civil action and to determine its effect
`
`on the issues.”). For these reasons, Opposer's motion for a suspension of Board proceedings
`
`should be granted.
`
`B. Suspension of TTAB Proceedings Will Avoid Duplicative Piecemeal Proceedings and
`Unnecessary Burden to the Parties and This Board
`
`The TTAB's practice of favoring suspension of opposition proceedings pending the
`
`outcome of civil actions reflects a policy of favoring the efficient adjudication of all issues
`
`presented in a single forum, rather than in piecemeal adjudications that waste the resources of
`
`the parties and the TTAB itself. In short, a suspension of this Opposition Proceeding will avoid
`
`unnecessary duplication of proceedings on registration issues that will ultimately be subject to
`
`appeal and resolution by the District Court itself. Such issues are now pending before the Court
`
`and their resolution may have a direct bearing on the outcome of this Opposition Proceeding.
`
`Accordingly, this Opposition Proceeding should be suspended to conserve the resources of the
`
`parties and this Board alike.
`
`4
`
`

`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Opposer's motion to suspend this Opposition Proceeding
`
`pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 2.117 and TBMP 510.02(a) pending the outcome and termination of the
`
`civil action now pending before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois should
`
`be granted.
`
`Dated: April 17, 2012
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`s/David J. Dawsey/
`
`David J. Dawsey
`Michael J. Gallagher
`GALLAGHER & DAWSEY CO,. L.P.A.
`P.O. Box 785
`Columbus, OH 43216
`Phone: 614.228.6280
`Fax: 614.228.6704
`
`Attorneys for Applicant
`Brenda F. Jones
`
`5
`
`

`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on this 17th day of April, 2012, the forgoing Motion to Suspend
`Opposition Proceedings was served, by mailing same by US First Class mail, on the following
`correspondent as set forth in the records of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office:
`
`Ryan M. Kaiser
`AMIN TALATI, LLC
`225 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 700
`Chicago, IL 60601
`
`s/David J. Dawsey/
`David J. Dawsey
`
`6
`
`

`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`

`
`CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 4.2 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois
`
`https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?379123226576181-L_1_0-1
`
`United States District Court
`Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3 (Chicago)
`CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:11-cv-09274
`
`AO279,MASON
`
`Wm Wrigley Jr Company v. Swerve IP LLP
`Assigned to: Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber
`Demand: $75,000
`Cause: 15:44 Trademark Infringement
`
`Date Filed: 12/29/2011
`Jury Demand: Defendant
`Nature of Suit: 840 Trademark
`Jurisdiction: Federal Question
`
`Plaintiff
`Wm Wrigley Jr Company
`
`V.
`Defendant
`Swerve IP LLP
`
`represented by Regan Anne Smith
`Loeb & Loeb LLP
`321 N. Clark Street
`Suite 2300
`Chicago, IL 60654
`312 464 3100
`Fax: 312 862 2200
`Email: rasmith@loeb.com
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Douglas N. Masters
`Loeb & Loeb
`321 North Clark Street
`Suite 2300
`Chicago, IL 60606
`(312)464-3100
`Email: dmasters@loeb.com
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`represented by Rakesh Mahendra Amin
`Amin Talati, LLC
`225 North Michigan Avenue
`Suite 700
`Chicago, IL 60601
`(312) 327-3382
`Email: rakesh@amintalati.com
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Ryan Mathew Kaiser
`Amin Talati, LLC
`444 N. Orleans St.
`Suite 400
`Chicago, IL 60654
`(312) 327-3328
`Email: ryan@amintalati.com
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`
`1 of 3
`
`04/12/2012 3:42 PM
`
`

`
`CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 4.2 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois
`
`https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?379123226576181-L_1_0-1
`
`Counter Claimant
`Swerve IP LLP
`
`V.
`Counter Defendant
`Wm Wrigley Jr Company
`
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`represented by Rakesh Mahendra Amin
`(See above for address)
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Ryan Mathew Kaiser
`(See above for address)
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`represented by Regan Anne Smith
`(See above for address)
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Douglas N. Masters
`(See above for address)
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Date Filed
`
`# Docket Text
`
`12/29/2011
`
`1 COMPLAINT filed by Wm Wrigley Jr Company; N. Filing fee $ 350, receipt
`number 0752-6696721. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Masters, Douglas) (Entered:
`12/29/2011)
`
`12/30/2011
`
`2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Masters, Douglas) (Entered: 12/30/2011)
`
`12/30/2011
`
`12/30/2011
`
`12/30/2011
`
`12/30/2011
`
`12/30/2011
`
`3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Wm Wrigley Jr Company by Douglas N.
`Masters (Masters, Douglas) (Entered: 12/30/2011)
`
`4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Wm Wrigley Jr Company by Regan Anne
`Smith (Smith, Regan) (Entered: 12/30/2011)
`
`5 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Wm Wrigley Jr Company (Masters, Douglas)
`(Entered: 12/30/2011)
`
`6 Notice of Trademark Claims - Local Rule 3.4 by Wm Wrigley Jr Company (Masters,
`Douglas) (Entered: 12/30/2011)
`
` CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber. Designated as
`Magistrate Judge the Honorable Michael T. Mason. (jn, ) (Entered: 12/30/2011)
`
`12/30/2011
`
` SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Swerve IP LLP (daj, ) (Entered: 12/30/2011)
`
`01/03/2012
`
`02/15/2012
`
`02/15/2012
`
`7 MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. (psm, )
`(Entered: 01/03/2012)
`
`8 MINUTE entry before Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber: Status hearing set for
`4/17/2012 at 09:00 AM.Mailed notice (wp, ) (Entered: 02/15/2012)
`
`9 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Wm Wrigley Jr Company. Swerve IP
`LLP waiver sent on 2/28/2012, answer due 4/30/2012. (Masters, Douglas) (Entered:
`
`2 of 3
`
`04/12/2012 3:42 PM
`
`

`
`CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 4.2 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois
`
`https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?379123226576181-L_1_0-1
`
`02/15/2012
`
`03/02/2012
`
`03/02/2012
`
`03/02/2012
`
`03/02/2012
`
`03/14/2012
`
`03/26/2012
`
`03/28/2012
`
`02/15/2012)
`
`10 MINUTE entry before Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber: Status hearing reset for
`3/14/2012 at 09:00 AM.Mailed notice (wp, ) (Entered: 02/15/2012)
`
`11 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Swerve IP LLP by Ryan Mathew Kaiser
`(Kaiser, Ryan) (Entered: 03/02/2012)
`
`12 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Swerve IP LLP (Kaiser,
`Ryan) (Entered: 03/02/2012)
`
`13 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand , COUNTERCLAIM filed by Swerve IP
`LLP against Wm Wrigley Jr Company . by Swerve IP LLP(Kaiser, Ryan) (Entered:
`03/02/2012)
`
`14 ATTORNEY Appearance for Counter Claimant Swerve IP LLP, Defendant Swerve
`IP LLP by Rakesh Mahendra Amin (Amin, Rakesh) (Entered: 03/02/2012)
`
`15 MINUTE entry before Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber:Status hearing held on
`3/14/2012. Status hearing set for 5/15/2012 at 09:00 AM. Plaintiff to file its motion
`for preliminary injunction by 3/28/2012. Defendant's response to be filed by
`4/27/2012. Plaintiff's reply brief due 5/11/2012.Mailed notice (wp, ) (Entered:
`03/15/2012)
`
`16 ANSWER to counterclaim by Wm Wrigley Jr Company(Masters, Douglas) (Entered:
`03/26/2012)
`
`17 MOTION by Counter Claimant Swerve IP LLP for preliminary injunction
`(Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support of Motion, # 2 Declaration Echegarrua
`Decl., # 3 Exhibit Echegarrua Attachment A, # 4 Exhibit Echegarrua Attachment B,
`# 5 Exhibit Echegarrua Attachment C, # 6 Exhibit Echegarrua Attachment D, # 7
`Exhibit Echegarrua Attachment E, # 8 Declaration Kaiser Decl., # 9 Exhibit Kaiser
`Attachment A, # 10 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment B, # 11 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment
`C, # 12 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment D, # 13 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment E, # 14
`Exhibit Kaiser Attachment F, # 15 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment G, # 16 Exhibit Kaiser
`Attachment H, # 17 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment I, # 18 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment J,
`# 19 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment K, # 20 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment L, # 21 Exhibit
`Kaiser Attachment M, # 22 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment N, # 23 Exhibit Kaiser
`Attachment O, # 24 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment P, # 25 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment Q,
`# 26 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment R, # 27 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment S, # 28 Exhibit
`Kaiser Attachment T, # 29 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment U, # 30 Exhibit Kaiser
`Attachment V, # 31 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment W, # 32 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment
`X, # 33 Exhibit Kaiser Attachment Y)(Kaiser, Ryan) (Entered: 03/28/2012)
`
`03/28/2012
`
`18 NOTICE of Motion by Ryan Mathew Kaiser for presentment of motion for
`preliminary injunction,,,,, 17 before Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber on 4/17/2012
`at 09:30 AM. (Kaiser, Ryan) (Entered: 03/28/2012)
`
`PACER Service Center
`Transaction Receipt
`04/12/2012 14:41:48
`Client Code:
`Search Criteria:
`Cost:
`
`gd0315
`Docket Report
`3
`
`PACER Login:
`Description:
`Billable Pages:
`
`1:11-cv-09274
`0.30
`
`3 of 3
`
`04/12/2012 3:42 PM
`
`

`
`EXHIBIT B-1
`
`EXHIBIT B-1
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 1 of 8 Page|D #:1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`% Case No.:
`
`) )
`
`)
`
`WM. WRIGLEY JR. COMPANY,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V-
`
`SWERVE IP LLC,
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`In this action, Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company (Wrigley) seeks a declaratory judgment
`
`that its use of SWERVE as mark for a sour tropical flavor indicator for its 5 brand of chewing
`
`gum does not infringe any trademark rights of Swerve IP LLC (Swerve IP),
`
`including U.S.
`
`Trademark Registration No. 3,679,639 for SWERVE in class 30 for natural sweetener, or
`
`otherwise subj ect Wrigley to liability under state andfconimon law unfair competition laws,
`
`including the laws of the State of Illinois.
`
`PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Wrigley is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Chicago,
`
`Illinois. Wrigley is a leading manufacturer and seller of non—chocolate confectionery products
`
`and is, and at all relevant times has been, qualified to do business in the state of Illinois.
`
`Its
`
`intellectual property is managed and controlled from its offices in Chicago, Illinois.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant, Swerve IP, claims to be a Louisiana limited liability corporation with
`
`its principal place of business in New Orleans, Louisiana. On information and belief, Swerve IP
`
`has directed commercial activities related to the its use of SWERVE toward the State of Illinois
`
`CI-183917 . l
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 2 of 8 Page|D #:2
`
`and the Eastern District of Illinois, including by marketing, advertising, offering for sale, and/or
`
`selling SWERVE-branded sweetener at trade shows and other outlets in this District, as well as
`
`through its websites and social messaging pages at Facebook and Twitter. As advertised on
`
`Swerve IP’s website, “Swerve Sweetener can be found at health food and grocery stores
`
`throughout the Country.”
`
`4.
`
`Swerve IP recently announced its intention to further its expansion into retail
`
`stores nationwide.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`Wrigley’s claims arise under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq. This
`
`Court hasjurisdiction over this action under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1121, and 28 U.S.C. §§ I331, 1338, as
`
`well as under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 as the parties are from different states and the amount in
`
`controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive and interest and costs. Declaratory relief is warranted by
`
`28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because
`
`Defendant conducts its ordinary business activities in this District, and has focused its unlawful
`
`conduct in this District.
`
`WRIGLEY’S USE OF SWERVE IN CONNECTION WITH 5 GUM
`
`6.
`
`Since 2007, Wrigley has marketed and sold 5 brand gum in the United States
`
`under a variety of flavors. Each flavor of5 brand gum is sold in a distinctive black package with
`
`the trademark “5” prominently on the front, as shown below with the exemplary flavors
`
`identified by the marks RAIN, COBALT, FLARE, and EL-IXIR:
`
`[.31-I8 3’-ll"! .1
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:2
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 3 of 8 Page|D #:3
`
`7.
`
`5 brand gum is marketed in connection with the slogan “Stimulate Your Senses"
`
`and phrases that identify sensory experiences consumers will experience when enjoying the
`
`product. For example:
`
`- Rain®...a tingling Spearmint
`
`- Cobalt®...a cooling peppermint
`
`- Fla:re®...a warming cinnamon
`
`- Elixir®...a mouthwatering berry
`
`- Lush"'M...a crisp tropical
`
`- SolsticeTM_/.a warm and cool winter
`
`- Zing'““...a sour to sweet bubble
`
`C118 3917 . J.
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:3
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 4 of 8 Page|D #24
`
`- Reactfl“ Fruit...a unique fruit flavor experience
`
`- Reaetm Mint...a unique mint flavor experience
`
`- PrismTM... an electric watermelon
`
`- Vortex”... a juicy green apple
`
`8.
`
`On October 15, 2010, Wrigley filed Application No. 85/153,870 with the United
`
`States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) to register SWERVE in class 30 for “chewing
`
`gum.” A true and correct copy of the application submitted to the USPTO is attached as Exhibit
`
`A. At all relevant times, including the time of the filing of the application, Wrigley intended to
`
`use the SWERVE mark as a flavor indicator for 5 brand gum.
`
`9.
`
`On July 1. 2011 Wrigley launched a new flavor of 5 brand gum using the mark
`
`SWERVE as a flavor indicator. Like all 5 brand gum, this gum is sold in the same distinctive
`
`black package with the mark “5” prominently on the front and sensory related tagline
`
`.. a
`
`tangy to sweet tropical,” as shown below:
`
`: l5 PIECES SUGARFREEGUM
`
`E??¥¥‘OPlCAL
`
`w E as v
`....A ?ANGY'l'i3S
`
`.
`
`SWERVE IP’S OBJECTIONS AND THREATS TO WRIGLEY
`
`10.
`
`Swerve [P claims to market, advertise, and sell SWERVE branded sugar-free
`
`sweetener throughout the United States under the following packaging:
`
`CH8I3.'~3.l.'i‘ . 1
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:4
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 5 of 8 Page|D #:5
`
`
`
`1 1.
`
`On March 9, 201 1, Swerve IP filed an opposition to Wrigley’s application to
`
`register SWERVE pending before the USPTO. This opposition is currently pending before the
`
`Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
`
`12.
`
`Shortly after Swerve IP commenced its opposition, Wrigley informed Swerve [P
`
`of its intended use of the SWERVE mark as a flavor indicator for 5 brand gum. and even sent
`
`Swerve IP a depiction of the packaging for yet to be released 5 brand gum bearing the SWERVE
`
`mark so it could see how the mark would appear when the product launched later on 2011.
`
`13.
`
`Several months after Wrigley’s began selling gum bearing the SWERVE mark in
`
`the packaging previously provided to Swerve IP, Swerve IP’s counsel sent Wrigley’s counsel an
`
`email stating: “Swerve. LLC objects to your client’s use of its SWERVE mark. and demands that
`
`Wrigley immediately cease and desist from any further use.”
`
`14.
`
`Swerve [P reiterated its objection to Wrigley’s use of SWERVE in subsequent
`
`correspondence and telephone calls.
`
`t.'lIlE3 3 917" . l
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:5
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 6 of 8 Page|D #:6
`
`WRlGLEY"S USE OF SWERVE IS NOT LIKELY TO CAUSE CONFUSION
`
`15.
`
`Wrigley is not aware of any instances of actual confusion between Swerve IP or
`
`its products on the one hand, and Wrigley or Wrigley’s use of its SWERVE mark on the other
`
`hand.
`
`16.
`
`Upon information and belief, Swerve IP is not aware of any instances of actual
`
`confusion between Swerve [P or its products on the one hand, and Wrigley or Wrigley’s use of
`
`its SWERVE mark on the other hand.
`
`17.
`
`Consumers are not likely to be confused by Wrigley'"s use of SWERVE in
`
`connection with its 5 brand gum. Consumers understand Wrigley’s use of its SWERVE mark
`
`serves to identify the flavor of Wrig1ey‘s 5 brand gum and do not believe that Wrigley’s use of
`
`SWERVE identifies a brand of the sweetener, or an affiliation with Swerve IP.
`
`18.
`
`Wrigley has not, willfully or otherwise, engaged in actions which are likely to
`
`cause confusion or mistake or deception as to the affiliation, eonnection or association of
`
`Wrigley or it gum with Swerve IP, or as to the origin, source, sponsorship. approval, or
`
`responsibility of Swerve IP for Wrigley’s goods or services. Wrigley is not infringing Swerve
`
`lP’s rights in SWERVE trademark.
`
`WRIGLEY REQUIRES DECLARATORY RELIEF.
`
`I9.
`
`Wrigley seeks a declaration of its rights. pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 & 2202.
`
`that its use of the SWERVE mark in relation to 5 gum does not infringe any trademark rights of
`
`Swerve IP.
`
`20.
`
`Swerve lP’s allegations, if proven by Swerve IP, would subject Wrigley to
`
`liability for trademark infringement pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 l 14 and l l25(a),
`
`as well as unfair competition laws of the various states, including, the State of Illinois.
`
`:.’?EIl$i-‘917 . l
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:6
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 7 of 8 Page|D #:7
`
`21.
`
`Unless and until Wrigley’s use of SWERVE is determined not to violate any
`
`rights of Swerve IP, Wrigley’s ability to advertise, market, and sell its gum will be wrongfully
`
`and unnecessarily impaired and clouded, and Wrigley will continue to be inj urcd and damaged
`
`by this threat. Accordingly, Wrigley seeks declaratory relief from this Court.
`
`22.
`
`A real and actual controversy presently exists between the parties to this action
`
`which is concrete and justiciable in character, and as to which each party possesses an interest in
`
`resolving The controversy between Wrigley and Swerve IP warrants relief declaring the rights
`
`of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 & 2202, and finding that Wrig1ey’s current and
`
`related uses of SWERVE in connection with 5 brand gum does not violate the Lanham Act, or
`
`the unfair completion laws of the State of Illinois, including the State of Illinois.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREI-‘ORE, Wrigley respectfully requests that this Court grant relief against
`
`SWERVE IP as follows:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`declaring that Wrigley’s use of its SW ERVE mark does not infringe the
`trademark rights of SWERVE [P under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C- §
`1 l 14,
`1 125(3), or under the unfair competition laws of the various states,
`including the State of Illinois;
`
`awarding Wrigley its costs and expenses of litigation, including reasonable
`attorneys’ fees; and
`
`such other and further relief as this Court deems just and equitable.
`
`LIIIB 3%_l_'.-‘
`
`. l
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:7
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 8 of 8 Page|D #:8
`
`Dated: December 29. 201 1
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`LOEB & LOEB LLP
`
`By: si’D0uglas N. Masters
`Douglas N. Masters #6199010
`dmastcrs@l0eb.com
`Regan A. Smith #6290795
`rasmith@,l0eb.c0m
`321 North Clark Street. Suite 2300
`
`Chicago, Illinois 60654
`Tel: (312) 464-3100
`Fax: (312)464-3111
`
`Attorneysfin‘ Plaintiff’
`
`CI1'839‘-_'i' . l
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:8
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 1 of 6 Page|D #:9
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:9
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 2 of 6 Page|D #:1O
`
`
`
`H Trnanilennark/Service Mark Application, Principal Register
`
`TEAS Plus Application
`
`Serial Number: 85153870
`
`Filing Date: 10;‘15;‘20l0
`
`NOTE: Datafields with the "‘ are mandatory under TEAS Plus. The wording "(ifapplicable) " appears
`where thefieid is only mandatory ander the facts afthe particular application.
`
`The table below presents the data as entered.
`
`
`: "FE;-‘LS Plus
`' ‘(F8
`
`' MARK INFORMATION
`
`«MARK
`
`_
`
`'-*S'l‘ANDARD CHARACTERS
`
`USPTO-GENERATED IMAGE
`
`LITERAL ELEMENT
`
`' ""MARK STATEMENT
`
`APPLICANT INFORMATION
`
`_
`
`'*'OWNER OF MARK
`‘”STRFtE:l".
`""CI'l'Y
`3 ‘STATE
`(Required for U.S. applicants)
`
`*c0UNTRv
`
`* ZIPIPOSTAI. CODE
`
`(Required for U.S. applicants only}
`
`PHONE
`
`FAX
`
`SWERVI3
`
`YES
`
`' YES
`
`SWERVE
`
`The mark consists of standard characters,
`3 without claim to any particular font, style,
`size, or color.
`
`Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company
`410 North Michigan Avenue
`Chicago
`
`
`
`mmms
`
`3 United States
`
`.
`
`.312-644-212'
`
`312-645-3503
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:10
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 3 of 6 Page|D #211
`
`EMAIL ADDRESS
`
`trademark.clepaI1ment@wrig1ey.cOm
`
` ECORPORATIOBW...
`
`......
`
`3 S'l‘ATE!COUNTRY OF INCORPORATION
`Z GOODS ANDIOE SER\./IIIJES
`INTERNATIONAL CLASS
`____mENTmCATION
`*FI|..ING BASIS
`ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
`
`H
`
`I
`
`__
`
`"TRANSLATION
`
`{if applicable)
`
`'*'TRANSI.ITF.RATION
`
`(if applicable}
`
`='=Ci.AIIvII?,D PRIOR REGISTRATION
`(if applicable}
`
`'*'C()NSENT (NAME!LIKENESS}
`(if appiicablc}
`
`I *CONCURRENT USE CLAIM
`(if applicable}
`
`ATTORN EY INFORMATION
`
`Deiaware
`
`030'” I
`C_h_¢Wi_n_g gum
`1(b)
`I
`
`I
`
`I
`
`H
`
`.
`I
`
`.
`
`__
`
`I
`
`§.
`
`f
`
`i
`I
`
`STREET
`
`CITY
`
`STATE
`
`COUNTRY
`
`ZIPIPOSTAL CODE
`
`FAX
`
`410 North Michigan Avenue
`
`Chicago
`
`Illinois
`
`United States
`
`606] 1
`
`312-645-3503
`
`EMAIL ADDRESS
`
`trademark.dcpartrncrIt@wrigley.com
`
`AUTHORIZED TO COMMUNICATE VIA EMAIL I Yes
`
`OTHER APPOINTED ATTORNEY
`
`Ann Chen
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:11
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 4 of 6 Page|D #212
`
`CORRESPONDENCE INFORMATION
`
`TISTREET
`' -==cITY
`-J= STATE
`
`9-'c0UN'rRY
`
`"ZIPIPOSTAL CODE
`PHONE
`FAX
`
`"“ EMAIL ADDRESS
`
`Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company
`_ 410 North Michigan Avenue
`' Chicago
`
`United States
`
`60611
`.... 312-644-212'
`312-645-3503
`
`trademark.departrner1t@wrigley.com
`
`‘*AUTI-IORIZEI) TO COMMUNICATE VIA
`EMAIL
`"H FEE INFORMATION
`
`§ NUMBER OF CLASSES
`
`FEE PER CLASS
`
`*TOTAL FEE PAID
`
`SIGNATURE INFORMATION
`
`2
`
`1
`
`275
`
`' * SIGNATURE
`
`=’Stacy Chronopoulosx’
`
`"' SlGNAT0RY'S NAME
`
`Stacy P. Chronopoulos
`
`' * SlGNAT0RY'S POSITION
`
`Chief Trademark Counsel
`
`3
`
`"' DATE SIGNED
`
`10/] $2010
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:12
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—cv—O9274 Document #2 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 5 of 6 Page|D #213
`
`
`
`Trademark/Service Mark Application, Principal Register
`
`TEAS Plus Application
`
`Serial Number: 85153870
`
`Filing Date: 10fl5f2l}10
`
`To the Commissioner t'or Trademarks:
`
`MARK: SW ERVE ( Standard Characters, see mark}
`The literal element of the mark consists of SWERVE.
`
`The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font, style, size, or color.
`
`The applicant, Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company, a corporation of Delaware, having an address of
`410 North Michigan Avenue
`
`Chicago, Illinois 60611
`United States
`
`requests registration of the trademarkfservice mark identified above in the United States Patent and
`Trademark Office on the Principal Register established by the Act of July 5, 1946 (15 U.S.C. Section 1051
`et scq.), as amended, for the following:
`
`For specific filing basis information for each item, you must view the display within the Input Table.
`International Class 030: Chewing gum
`Intent to Use: The applicant has a bona fide intention to use or use through the applicant's related company
`or licensee the mark in commerce on or in connection with the identified goods andfor services. (15
`U.S.C. Section l05l(b)).
`
`The applicant's current Attorney Information:
`Stacy P. Chronopoulos and Ann Chen ofwm. Wrigley Jr. Company
`410 North Michigan Avenue
`
`Chicago, Illinois 606] 1
`United States
`
`The attorney docketfreference number is F5 V3.
`The docketfreference number is FSV3.
`
`The applicant's current Correspondence Information:
`
`Stacy P. Chronopoulos
`
`Wm. Wrigley .lr. Company
`
`410 North Michigan Avenue
`
`Chicago, Illinois 606] 1
`
`3 12-644-212] (phone)
`312-645-3503tt‘ax}
`
`Case: 1:11-cv-09274 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 12/29/11 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:13
`
`

`
`Case: 1:11—c