throbber
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
`CHATTANOOGA DIVISION
`
`
`REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetics,
`
`PLLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`a Tennessee PLLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`) Civil Action No. ________________
`)
`Refined Looks at the Plastic Surgery Group, PLLC )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`a Tennessee PLLC,
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`)
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff, REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetics, PLLC (“Plaintiff”), in support of
`
`its claims against Defendant, Refined Looks at the Plastic Surgery Group, PLLC (“Defendant”),
`
`alleges the following:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff, REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetics, PLLC is a Tennessee
`
`Professional Limited Liability Company located at 660 S. Mt. Juliet Rd., Ste. 120, Mt. Juliet, TN
`
`37122.
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff has additional office locations throughout Tennessee, including the cities
`
`Brentwood, Nashville, Gallatin, Lebanon, and Hermitage.
`
`3.
`
` On information and belief, Defendant is a Tennessee Professional Limited
`
`Liability Company that is located at, and maintains an address for service of process at, 901
`
`Riverfront Parkway, Ste. 100, Chattanooga, TN 37402.
`
`1
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1
`
`

`

`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`4.
`
`This is an action for trademark infringement arising under 15 U.S.C. §1114 and at
`
`common law, for unfair competition arising under 15 U.S.C. §1125(a) and at common law, for
`
`unfair competition arising under 15 U.S.C. §1125(c), for trademark infringement of a registered
`
`mark in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-25-501, et seq., and for unfair competition and
`
`deceptive trade practices in violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act arising under
`
`Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-18-101, et seq.
`
`5.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims for trademark
`
`infringement, unfair competition, and trademark dilution pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1121, and 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332, and 1338.
`
`6.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants have advertised, sold, and/or provided
`
`goods/services within this judicial district. Accordingly, this Court has personal jurisdiction over
`
`the Defendants.
`
`7.
`
`This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims arising under the
`
`laws of Tennessee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). On information and belief, these claims are so
`
`related to Plaintiff’s claims under federal law that they form part of the same case or controversy
`
`and derive from a common nucleus of operative fact.
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff is a Tennessee Professional Limited Liability Company doing business
`
`under the name REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetics, PLLC, organized on October 9,
`
`2018.
`
`2
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 2 of 17 PageID #: 2
`
`

`

`10.
`
`Refine Medspa, PLLC is a Tennessee Professional Limited Liability Company
`
`under common ownership and control with the Plaintiff.
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiff owns U.S. Registration Number 6,039,900 for the trademark “REFINE |
`
`Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics” for use of the trademark in connection with “Cosmetic and
`
`plastic surgery; Medical services, namely, Cosmetic Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery”
`
`(the “REFINE Trademark”).
`
`12.
`
`A true and correct copy of the Registration Certificate is attached hereto as
`
`Exhibit A.
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiff provides cosmetic and plastic surgery and medical services, namely,
`
`cosmetic facial plastic and reconstructive surgery under its REFINE Trademark.
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff has used its REFINE Trademark in interstate commerce, and within the
`
`State of Tennessee, since at least as early as October 9, 2018.
`
`15.
`
`Plaintiff owns Tennessee Registration Number 55458, registered on December 28,
`
`2018, for the trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics” for use in connection
`
`with Medical Services.
`
`16.
`
`A true and correct copy of the Tennessee Registration Certificate is attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit B.
`
`17.
`
`Plaintiff advertises its services under its REFINE Trademark in print and electronic
`
`media, in trade journals, newspapers, and magazines and via the Internet and Social Media,
`
`including, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, among others.
`
`18.
`
`Plaintiff has received unsolicited news coverage in well-known and widely-
`
`distributed “lifestyle” magazines, such as “Haute Living.”
`
`3
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 3 of 17 PageID #: 3
`
`

`

`19.
`
`The dominant feature of Plaintiff’s Refine trademark is the first word in the
`
`trademark, the word “REFINE.”
`
`20.
`
`Defendant Refined Looks at the Plastic Surgery Group, PLLC is a Tennessee
`
`Professional Limited Liability Company, organized on October 7, 2019.
`
`21.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant operates a medical spa business and
`
`advertises, promotes, and provides its cosmetic and plastic surgery and related medical services,
`
`in Tennessee, using the names “Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined
`
`Looks Plastic Surgery.”
`
`22.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant advertises its services under the names
`
`“Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” in print
`
`and electronic media, in trade journals, newspapers, and magazines and via the Internet and Social
`
`Media, including, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, among others.
`
`23.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant advertises its services under the names
`
`“Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” on the
`
`websites refineaestheticstudio.com, refinedlooks.com and refinedlooks.com/spa (“Defendant’s
`
`Websites”). A true and correct copy of the “About” page from Defendant’s Websites is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit C.
`
`24.
`
`Plaintiff first learned of the Defendant’s use of the name “Refine Aesthetic Studio”
`
`when a current patient of the Plaintiff’s medical practice asked about Plaintiff’s new location in
`
`Chattanooga, Tennessee.
`
`25.
`
`Plaintiff currently has no offices in Chattanooga, Tennessee; however, Plaintiff
`
`does have patients in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
`
`4
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 4 of 17 PageID #: 4
`
`

`

`26.
`
`After learning of “Refine Aesthetic Studio,” Plaintiff investigated the existence of
`
`any business in Tennessee using the name “Refine Aesthetic Studio.”
`
`27.
`
`In 2020, despite diligent efforts to investigate the legal status of the business,
`
`Plaintiff was unable to locate any business registration or application, or any assumed name
`
`registration or application, for the name “Refine Aesthetic Studio” with the Tennessee Secretary
`
`of State, or with the Hamilton County Clerk, the county in which Chattanooga is located.
`
`28.
`
`True and correct copies of the results of these searches are attached hereto as Group
`
`Exhibit D.
`
`29.
`
`On information and belief, the domain name refineaestheticstudio.com now re-
`
`directs to the website at the domain name refinedlooks.com.
`
`30.
`
`On information and belief, Plaintiff and Defendant provide identical services, to the
`
`same class of consumers, and the parties advertise and provide their services in the same channels
`
`of trade.
`
`31.
`
`According to Defendant’s Websites, “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” is located at
`
`901 Riverfront Parkway, STE 100, Chattanooga, TN 37402, and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery”
`
`now has a second location at 1949 Gunbarrel Road, Suite 303 Chattanooga, TN 37421. “Refine
`
`Aesthetic Studio” was previously located at the Riverfront Parkway address.
`
`32.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant intentionally chose the name “Refine
`
`Aesthetic Studio” because the name contains both the word “REFINE” and the word
`
`“AESTHETIC,” which are the two dominant words in Plaintiff’s mark, appearing as the first and
`
`last words of the mark.
`
`5
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 5 of 17 PageID #: 5
`
`

`

`33.
`
`On October 7, 2020, Plaintiff, through counsel, wrote to Defendant informing it of
`
`Plaintiff’s superior rights in the name REFINE and the existence of the Federal and State of
`
`Tennessee trademark registrations.
`
`34.
`
`On October 7, 2020, Plaintiff demanded that Defendant change its name to any
`
`other name that does not contain the word Refine.
`
`35.
`
`36.
`
`On November 6, 2020, Defendant, through Counsel declined to change its name.
`
`Despite Plaintiff’s admonition to not use a name containing the word REFINE, on
`
`January 24, 2021, Defendant registered the assumed name “Refine Aesthetic Studio” with the
`
`Tennessee Secretary of State. A true and correct copy of a printout of the filing information
`
`obtained from the Tennessee Secretary of State website, is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
`
`37.
`
`Defendant acted in bad faith when it registered the assumed name “Refine Aesthetic
`
`Studio” with the Tennessee Secretary of State.
`
`38.
`
`Despite Plaintiff’s admonition to not use a name containing the word REFINE,
`
`Defendant has expanded its use of the word “refine” to two separate brands, offering services that
`
`compete with Plaintiff under both the “Refined Looks Spa” mark and “Refined Looks Plastic
`
`Surgery” mark.
`
`39.
`
`Despite Plaintiff’s admonition to not use a name containing the word REFINE,
`
`Defendant asserts it has used a version of REFINED LOOKS in commerce since April 20, 2020
`
`and has now applied to register with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office two marks
`
`incorporating the words REFINED LOOKS for services pertaining to “Cosmetic skin care
`
`services; Providing medical aesthetic procedures, namely, treating the skin with dermal fillers and
`
`botulinum toxin; Facial treatments; Laser and light treatments; Injectable treatments; Fat reduction
`
`treatments; Hair removal treatments,” identified as U.S. Serial Numbers 90817810 and 90817822.
`
`6
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 6 of 17 PageID #: 6
`
`

`

`40.
`
`Despite Plaintiff’s admonition to not use a name containing the word REFINE,
`
`Defendant asserts it has used a version of REFINED LOOKS in commerce since April 20, 2020
`
`and has now applied to register with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office another two marks
`
`incorporating the words REFINED LOOKS for “Cosmetic skin care services; Medical services,
`
`namely, cosmetic, plastic, and reconstructive surgery, and hand surgery; Providing medical
`
`aesthetic procedures, namely, treating the skin with dermal fillers and botulinum toxin; Surgery;
`
`Facial treatments; Laser and light treatments; Injectable treatments; Fat reduction treatments; Hair
`
`removal treatments,” identified as U.S. Serial Numbers 90817838 and 90817841.
`
`41.
`
`Despite Plaintiff’s admonition to not use a name containing the word REFINE,
`
`Defendant asserts it has used a version of REFINED LOOKS in commerce since April 20, 2020
`
`and has now applied to register with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office another mark
`
`incorporating the words REFINED LOOKS for “Cosmetic skin care services; Medical services,
`
`namely, cosmetic, plastic, and reconstructive surgery, and hand surgery; Providing medical
`
`aesthetic procedures, namely, treating the skin with dermal fillers and botulinum toxin; Surgery,”
`
`identified as U.S. Serial Number 90817847.
`
`COUNT I
`(Trademark Infringement under 15 U.S.C. §1114)
`
`Plaintiff owns a protectible trademark. Plaintiff owns U.S. Registration Number
`
`42.
`
`6039900 for the trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics” for use of the
`
`trademark in connection with “Cosmetic and plastic surgery; and Medical services, namely,
`
`Cosmetic Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.”
`
`43.
`
`44.
`
`Defendant has used the trademark in commerce and without Plaintiff’s consent.
`
`On information and belief Defendant adopted the name “Refine Aesthetic Studio”
`
`after Plaintiff organized its PLLC, after Plaintiff adopted and used the REFINE Trademark in
`
`7
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 7 of 17 PageID #: 7
`
`

`

`Tennessee, after Plaintiff registered its Tennessee trademark, and with actual knowledge of
`
`Plaintiff’s rights in the REFINE Trademark.
`
`45.
`
`Plaintiff objected to Defendant’s use of the “Refine Aesthetic Studio” on the ground
`
`that it was causing actual consumer confusion and violating Plaintiff’s rights in the REFINE
`
`Trademark.
`
`46.
`
`Subsequently, Defendant registered the assumed name “Refine Aesthetic Studio”
`
`with the Tennessee Secretary of State.
`
`47.
`
`Defendant is using the assumed name or marks “Refine Aesthetic Studio” and
`
`“Refined Looks” without Plaintiff’s consent. Plaintiff has not given consent to Defendant to use
`
`any variation of “Refine,” and Plaintiff has clearly communicated its exclusive rights in the
`
`REFINE Trademark.
`
`48.
`
`Defendant’s “Refine Aesthetic Studio” is similar in appearance, sound, meaning,
`
`and commercial impression to Plaintiff’s trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and
`
`Aesthetics” because of the presence of the words “REFINE” and “AESTHETIC,” in Defendant’s
`
`mark, which are identical to the two dominant words in Plaintiff’s REFINE Trademark.
`
`49.
`
`Defendant’s “Refine Looks” is similar in appearance, sound, meaning, and
`
`commercial impression to Plaintiff’s trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics”
`
`because of the presence of the word “REFINE” and “Refined” in each, which are the same
`
`dominant words in both marks.
`
`50.
`
`Defendant promotes and provides its cosmetic surgery services under the names
`
`“Refine Aesthetic Studio” and “Refined Looks,” which are confusingly similar to the Plaintiff’s
`
`REFINE Trademark.
`
`51.
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s services are very similar and overlapping.
`
`8
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 8 of 17 PageID #: 8
`
`

`

`52.
`
`53.
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s potential customers are identical.
`
`Plaintiff is aware of actual consumer confusion caused by Defendant’s use of the
`
`assumed name “Refine Aesthetic Studio.”
`
`54.
`
`Plaintiff learned from a current patient of the Plaintiff’s medical practice that the
`
`patient was confused and mistaken as to the existence of Plaintiff’s new office location in
`
`Chattanooga, Tennessee.
`
`55.
`
`Plaintiff’s patient confused Defendant’s “Refine Aesthetic Studio” business in
`
`Chattanooga, Tennessee with Plaintiff’s REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics business.
`
`56.
`
`Defendant’s assumed name or mark “Refine Aesthetic Studio” and “Refined
`
`Looks” are highly similar in sound, meaning, and overall commercial impression to Plaintiff’s
`
`REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics trademark.
`
`57.
`
`Defendant’s use of “Refine Aesthetic Studio” and “Refined Looks” has caused
`
`actual harm to Plaintiff and will continue to cause actual harm unless the Defendant is enjoined
`
`from further use of the name, or any confusingly similar variation thereof, to which Plaintiff is
`
`entitled pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1116.
`
`58.
`
`Defendant’s “Refined Looks Spa” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” marks are
`
`highly similar in sound, meaning, and overall commercial impression to and are used with the
`
`same goods and services as Plaintiff’s REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics trademark.
`
`59.
`
`Defendant’s “Refined Looks Spa” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” are likely
`
`to cause confusion with Plaintiff’s REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics trademark
`
`among the relevant consumers.
`
`60.
`
`Defendant’s use of “Refined Looks Spa” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” has
`
`caused actual harm to Plaintiff and will continue to cause actual harm unless the Defendant is
`
`9
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 9 of 17 PageID #: 9
`
`

`

`enjoined from further use of the name, or any confusingly similar variation thereof, to which
`
`Plaintiff is entitled pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1116.
`
`61.
`
`Such acts by Defendant further cause harm to Plaintiff as to which Plaintiff is
`
`entitled to recover actual damages, Defendant’s profits, and the costs of the action pursuant to 15
`
`U.S.C. §1117 as well as the costs of any necessary corrective advertising.
`
`62.
`
`Defendant has willfully and intentionally adopted a mark confusingly similar to
`
`Plaintiff’s REFINE mark, and Defendant’s acts of infringement constitute willful infringement.
`
`63.
`
`Given that Defendant’s conduct is intentional and willful, Plaintiff is entitled to an
`
`accounting of profits, attorneys’ fees, and treble damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1117.
`
`COUNT II
`(Unfair Competition arising under 15 U.S.C. §1125(a))
`
`Defendant’s use of “Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined
`
`64.
`
`Looks Plastic Surgery” is unfair competition in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1125(a).
`
`65.
`
`66.
`
`Plaintiff owns U.S. Registration Number 6039900 for the REFINE Trademark.
`
`Defendant’s “Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks
`
`Plastic Surgery” marks are confusingly similar and likely to cause confusion with Plaintiff’s
`
`REFINE Trademark.
`
`67.
`
`Defendant’s “Refine Aesthetic Studio” is similar in appearance, sound, meaning,
`
`and commercial impression to Plaintiff’s trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and
`
`Aesthetics” because of the presence of the words “REFINE” and “AESTHETIC,” the two
`
`dominant words in Plaintiff’s REFINE Trademark.
`
`68.
`
`Defendant’s “Refined Looks Spa” is similar in appearance, sound, meaning, and
`
`commercial impression to Plaintiff’s trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics”
`
`10
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 10 of 17 PageID #: 10
`
`

`

`because of the presence of the word “REFINE” – the dominant word in Plaintiff’s REFINE
`
`Trademark suggesting a connection between Plaintiff’s services and Plaintiff’s mark.
`
`69.
`
`Defendant’s “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” is similar in appearance, sound,
`
`meaning, and commercial impression to Plaintiff’s trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery
`
`and Aesthetics” because of the presence of the word “REFINE” – the dominant word in Plaintiff’s
`
`REFINE Trademark – and “PLASTIC SURGERY” – suggesting a connection between Plaintiff’s
`
`services and Plaintiff’s mark.
`
`70.
`
`71.
`
`72.
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s services are identical.
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s potential customers are identical.
`
`Defendant’s use of “Refine Aesthetic Studio” has caused actual harm to Plaintiff
`
`and will continue to cause actual harm unless the Defendant is enjoined from further use of the
`
`name, or any confusingly similar variation thereof, to which Plaintiff is entitled pursuant to 15
`
`U.S.C. §1116.
`
`73.
`
`Such acts by Defendant further cause harm to Plaintiff as to which Plaintiff is
`
`entitled to recover actual damages, Defendant’s profits, and the costs of the action pursuant to 15
`
`U.S.C. §1117 as well as the costs of any necessary corrective advertising.
`
`74.
`
`Defendant has willfully and intentionally adopted a mark confusingly similar to
`
`Plaintiff’s REFINE mark, and Defendant’s acts of infringement constitute willful infringement.
`
`75.
`
`Given that Defendant’s conduct is intentional and willful, Plaintiff is entitled to an
`
`accounting of profits, attorneys’ fees, and treble damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1117.
`
`11
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 11 of 17 PageID #: 11
`
`

`

`COUNT III
`
`(Violation of Tennessee Trademark Act, Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-25-501, et seq.)
`
`76.
`
`Plaintiff owns a protectible trademark. Plaintiff owns Tennessee Registration
`
`Number 55458, for the trademark “REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics” for use in
`
`connection with Medical Services.
`
`77.
`
`78.
`
`Defendant has used the trademark in commerce and without Plaintiff’s consent.
`
`On information and belief Defendant adopted the names “Refine Aesthetic Studio,”
`
`“Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” after Plaintiff organized its PLLC,
`
`after Plaintiff adopted and used the REFINE Trademark in Tennessee, after Plaintiff registered its
`
`Tennessee trademark, and with actual knowledge of Plaintiff’s rights in the REFINE Trademark.
`
`79.
`
`Plaintiff objected to Defendant’s use of the word “Refine” in its name and branding
`
`on the ground that it was causing actual consumer confusion and violating Plaintiff’s rights in the
`
`REFINE Trademark.
`
`80.
`
`Subsequently, Defendant registered the assumed name “Refine Aesthetic Studio”
`
`with the Tennessee Secretary of State.
`
`81.
`
`82.
`
`Defendant’s actions were willful and intentional, in violation of Plaintiff’s rights.
`
`Defendant is using the assumed name or business name “Refine Aesthetic Studio,”
`
`“Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” without Plaintiff’s consent. Plaintiff
`
`has not given consent to Defendant to use the assumed name or business name “Refine Aesthetic
`
`Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” and Plaintiff has clearly
`
`communicated its exclusive rights in the REFINE Trademark.
`
`12
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 12 of 17 PageID #: 12
`
`

`

`83.
`
`Defendant promotes and provides its cosmetic surgery services under the names
`
`“Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” which are
`
`confusingly similar to the Plaintiff’s REFINE Trademark.
`
`84.
`
`85.
`
`86.
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s services are identical.
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s potential customers are identical.
`
`Defendant’s use of the assumed name “Refine Aesthetic Studio” caused actual
`
`consumer confusion with Plaintiff’s registered trademarks.
`
`87.
`
`Plaintiff learned from a current patient of Plaintiff’s medical practice that the
`
`patient was confused and mistaken as to the existence of Plaintiff’s new office location in
`
`Chattanooga, Tennessee.
`
`88.
`
`Plaintiff’s patient was confusing Defendant’s “Refine Aesthetic Studio” business
`
`in Chattanooga, Tennessee with Plaintiff’s REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics
`
`business.
`
`89.
`
`Defendant’s assumed names “Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and
`
`“Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” are highly similar in sound, meaning, and overall commercial
`
`impression to Plaintiff’s REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics trademark.
`
`90.
`
`Defendant’s use of “Refine Aesthetic Studio” has caused actual harm to Plaintiff in
`
`the forms of likelihood of confusion and actual confusion, and will continue to cause actual harm
`
`unless the Defendant is enjoined from further use of the name, or any confusingly similar variation
`
`thereof.
`
`91.
`
`Defendant’s “Refined Looks Spa” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” are also
`
`confusingly similar in the same manner as “Refine Aesthetic Studio.”
`
`13
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 13 of 17 PageID #: 13
`
`

`

`92.
`
`Such acts by Defendant further cause harm to Plaintiff as to which Plaintiff is
`
`entitled to recover actual damages, Defendant’s profits, the costs of the action, and other remedies
`
`pursuant to TCA § 47-25-514.
`
`93.
`
`Defendant has willfully and intentionally adopted a mark confusingly similar to
`
`Plaintiff’s REFINE mark, and Defendant’s acts of infringement constitute willful infringement.
`
`94.
`
`Given that Defendant’s conduct is intentional and willful, Plaintiff is entitled to an
`
`accounting of profits, attorneys’ fees, and treble damages pursuant to TCA § 47-25-514.
`
`COUNT IV
`(Violation of Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-18-101, et seq.)
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
`
`95.
`
`contained in the preceding paragraphs as if they were set out herein.
`
`96.
`
`In the course of its business, Defendant unfairly and deceptively promoted its
`
`business using the REFINE Trademark.
`
`97.
`
`Defendant is using the assumed names or business names “Refine Aesthetic
`
`Studio,” “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” without Plaintiff’s consent.
`
`Plaintiff has not given consent to Defendant to use the assumed name “Refine Aesthetic Studio”
`
`and Plaintiff has clearly communicated its exclusive rights in the REFINE Trademark.
`
`98.
`
`Defendant promotes and provides its cosmetic surgery services under the name
`
`“Refine Aesthetic Studio,” which is confusingly similar to the Plaintiff’s REFINE Trademark.
`
`99.
`
`Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s services are identical.
`
`100. Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s potential customers are identical.
`
`101. Defendant’s use of the assumed name “Refine Aesthetic Studio” caused actual
`
`consumer confusion with Plaintiff’s registered trademarks.
`
`14
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 14 of 17 PageID #: 14
`
`

`

`102. Plaintiff learned from a current patient of Plaintiff’s medical practice that the
`
`patient was confused and mistaken as to the existence of Plaintiff’s new office location in
`
`Chattanooga, Tennessee.
`
`103. Plaintiff’s patient was confusing Defendant’s “Refine Aesthetic Studio” business
`
`in Chattanooga, Tennessee with Plaintiff’s REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics
`
`business.
`
`104. Defendant’s assumed name or business name “Refine Aesthetic Studio,” “Refined
`
`Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery” is highly similar in sound, meaning, and overall
`
`commercial impression to Plaintiff’s REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics trademark.
`
`105. Defendant’s use of “Refine Aesthetic Studio” has caused actual harm to Plaintiff in
`
`the forms of likelihood of confusion and actual confusion, and will continue to cause actual harm
`
`unless the Defendant is enjoined from further use of the name, or any confusingly similar variation
`
`thereof.
`
`106. Such actions constitute unfair trade practices that are prohibited by Tenn. Code
`
`Ann. § 47-18-104(a) of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.
`
`107. The acts or practices described herein occurred in trade or commerce as defined in
`
`Tenn. Code Ann.§ 47-18-103(20).
`
`108. These acts or practices injured consumers in the State of Tennessee. Defendant’s
`
`actions directly and proximately caused Plaintiff’s injuries.
`
`109. Such acts by Defendant further cause harm to Plaintiff as to which Plaintiff is
`
`entitled to recover actual damages, Defendant’s profits, the costs of the action, and other remedial
`
`penalties, and nonremedial penalties of $5,000, pursuant to TCA § 47-18-104 and TCA § 47-18-
`
`108.
`
`15
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 15 of 17 PageID #: 15
`
`

`

`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics, PLLC respectfully
`
`requests that this Court enter an order for:
`
`i.
`
`Judgment against Defendant and a determination that Defendant’s use of Plaintiff’s
`
`REFINE Trademark is violating §43(a) of the Lanham Act,
`
`ii.
`
`Judgment against Defendant for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief
`
`prohibiting Defendants’ use of the words REFINE, REFINED, or AESTHETICS in
`
`any name or trademark;
`
`iii.
`
`Judgment against Defendant and an order to cancel or abandon the applied-for marks
`
`at the USPTO: U.S. Serial Numbers 90817810, 90817822, 90817838, 90817841, and
`
`90817847;
`
`iv.
`
`Judgment against Defendant and an award of Plaintiff’s actual damages and
`
`Defendant’s profits (constituting Plaintiff’s lost profits), to be proved at trial;
`
`v.
`
`Judgment against Defendant, a finding of willful infringement, and an award of treble
`
`damages under 15 U.S.C. §1117(b) because Defendant’s conduct was willful;
`
`vi.
`
`Judgment against Defendant and an award of Plaintiff’s costs and reasonable
`
`Attorney’s Fees incurred in prosecuting this lawsuit;
`
`vii.
`
`Judgment against Defendant and an award of the costs of corrective advertising in an
`
`amount equal to the amount spent by Defendant on any advertising of “Refine Aesthetic
`
`Studio, “Refined Looks Spa,” and “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery;”
`
`viii.
`
`Judgment against Defendant and an award of damages in an amount equal to the gross
`
`receipts received by Defendants for performance of medical services under the name
`
`“Refined Looks Spa,” or “Refined Looks Plastic Surgery;”
`
`16
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 16 of 17 PageID #: 16
`
`

`

`ix.
`
`Prejudgment interest and costs; and
`
`x.
`
`Such other relief the Court deems just and appropriate.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, REFINE | Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetics, PLLC hereby demands a trial by
`
`jury on all matters and issues triable by jury in this action.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Ryan D. Levy
`Ryan D. Levy (TN BPR No. 024568)
`Scott M. Douglass (TN BPR No. 031097)
`Patterson Intellectual Property Law, P.C.
`Roundabout Plaza
`1600 Division Street, Suite 500
`Nashville TN 37203
`(615) 242-2400
`rdl@iplawgroup.com
`smd@iplawgroup.com
`
`David M. Adler, Esq.
`To be admitted pro hac vice
`ILL Bar No. 6242403
`Adler Law Group
`300 Saunders Road, Suite 100
`Riverwoods, IL 60015
`Phone: (866) 734-2568
`Email: David@adler-law.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff REFINE | Facial Plastic
`Surgery & Aesthetics, PLLC
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`Case 1:21-cv-00261 Document 1 Filed 10/27/21 Page 17 of 17 PageID #: 17
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket