`
`
`
`Angilee K. Dakic, UT#12722
`PEARSON | BUTLER
`1802 South Jordan Parkway, Suite 200
`South Jordan, Utah 84095
`Tel: (801) 495-4104
`Email: angilee@pearsonbutler.com
`
`Attorney for Plaintiff
`Freightlink, Inc.
`
`FREIGHTLINK, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,
`DISTRICT OF UTAH
`COMPLAINT FOR TRADEMARK
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`
`Civil Action Case No.
`Judge:
`COMES NOW, Freightlink, Inc. (“Freightlink”) by and through its counsel hereby files
`
`
`v.
`
`UBER FREIGHTLINK,
`Defendants.
`
`this Complaint with Jury Demand against Defendant, Uber Freightlink (“Uber”).
`
`PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`1.
`
`Freightlink is a Utah corporation having a principal place of business at 6084 South
`
`900 East, Suite 200, Murray UT 84121.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Uber is a California corporation with its principal
`
`place of business at 182 Howard Street, Suite 8, San Francisco, CA 94105, and has various
`
`Satellite locations in Utah.
`
`3.
`
`Freightlink brings this action under U.S. Trademark laws (15 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq.).
`
`4.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1331 1338.
`
`
` 5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over any state of Utah statutory and
`
`common law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
`
` 6. Upon information and belief, this Court has specific personal jurisdiction over
`
`Complaint for Trademark Infringement
`Freightlink Inc. v. Uber Freight Link
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00051-BSJ Document 2 Filed 01/22/21 PageID.3 Page 2 of 7
`
`
`
`Uber because Uber has satellite locations in Utah and purposefully directed their activities to
`
`the state of Utah, have availed themselves to this jurisdiction, have minimum contacts with
`
`this forum, and this action is based upon activities that arise out of or related to those contacts.
`
`7. Additionally, upon information and belief, this Court has general personal
`
`jurisdiction over the Defendants because Utah is the primary place where the infringing acts
`
`have occurred, and such acts and contacts with Utah are substantial, continuous, and
`
`systematic.
`
`8. Venue is proper in the District of Utah pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`Freightlink’s Services AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
`
`
`9. Freightlink is in the business of shipping and transportation services.
`
`10. Freightlink is the owner of United States Trademark Registration No. 4,435,331 (the ‘331
`
`Registration), bearing the literal elements FREIGHTLINK for FREIGHT SHIPPING AND
`
`TRNSPORT SERVICES VIA TRUCK, AIR, SHIP, AND RAIL, in Class 039. See attached
`
`Exhibit A.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` DEFENDANTS’ INFRINGING ACTS
`
`11. Upon information and belief, Uber is using the term “Freight Link” in its branding of
`
`shipping and transportation services, which infringes the ‘331 Registration. See attached Exhibit B.
`
`12. Upon information and belief, Uber conducts business from physical locations where
`
`infringing acts are occurring, as well as online at www.uber.com. Refer to Exhibit B.
`
`13. Use of the mark FREIGHTLINK OR FREIGHT LINK in connection with shipping and
`
`Complaint for Trademark Infringement
`Freightlink Inc. v. Uber Freight Link
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00051-BSJ Document 2 Filed 01/22/21 PageID.4 Page 3 of 7
`
`
`
`
`transportation services is likely to cause confusion in light of Freightlink’s FREIGHTLINK
`
`mark. Not only does the term Uber Freightlink contain the entirety of the FREIGHTLINK mark,
`
`but it is very similar in sound and commercial impression to the FREIGHTLINK mark, as
`
`associated with the underlying services that target consumers and the channels of trade are
`
`identical.
`
`14. The Uber Freightlink services are sold in direct competition to the services associated
`
`with the ‘331 Registration.
`
`15. Therefore, it is clear that Uber’s use of the FREIGHTLINK mark is likely to cause
`
`confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive consumers as to the source and origin of the
`
`underlying goods. Upon information and belief, by adopting the mark UBER FREIGHT LINK
`
`under the current circumstances Uber has purposefully and intentionally attempted to trade on
`
`the good will associated with the FREIGHTLINK mark and ‘331 Registration.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`(Trademark Infringement of the FREIGHTLINK mark under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125)
`
`
`16. Freightlink hereby incorporates by reference the preceding allegations of this
`
`complaint as if set forth fully herein.
`
`17. Freightlink owns all right, title and interest in the FREIGHTLINK mark in relation
`
`to shipping and transportation services.
`
`18. Uber Freightlink has directly infringed the FREIGHTLINK mark by using the
`
`adopted mark of UBER FREIGHT LINK for shipping and transportation services.
`
`19. Uber’s infringing activities have damaged Freightlink in an amount to be
`
`proven at trial. Among other remedies, Freightlink is entitled to disgorge any of Uber’s profit
`
`from sales of its shipping and transportation services, as well as its lost profits and other
`
`Complaint for Trademark Infringement
`Freightlink Inc. v. Uber Freight Link
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00051-BSJ Document 2 Filed 01/22/21 PageID.5 Page 4 of 7
`
`
`
`damages sustained by Freightlink due to Uber’s infringing activities, and litigation costs for
`
`having to bring this action under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1125. Additionally, the harm to
`
`Freightlink arising from these acts by Uber is not fully compensable by money damages.
`
`Freightlink has suffered and continues to suffer irreparable harm that has no adequate remedy at
`
`law and that will continue unless this infringing conduct by Uber is preliminarily and
`
`permanently enjoined.
`
`20. Upon information and belief, Uber’s infringement of Freightlink’s trademark is
`
`willful and intentional.
`
`21. Legal counsel for Freightlink sent a cease and desist letter to Uber on October 16, 2020,
`
`but Uber was non-responsive, and Uber has not ceased use of the FREIGHTLINK mark. See
`
`attached Exhibit C.
`
`22. Upon information and belief, Uber sold, or offered for sale its infringing services using
`
`the FREIGHTLINK mark, knowing it would cause consumers to be confused as to the source or
`
`origin. Uber knew, or should have known, that its actions were highly likely to cause confusion,
`
`thereby resulting in infringement of the mark. As a consequence, Uber has engaged in willful
`
`infringement of the FREIGHTLINK mark. Freightlink is therefore entitled to treble damages and
`
`attorneys’ fees as well as costs incurred in this action along with prejudgment interest under 15
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1117.
`
`SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`(Unfair Competition, U.C.A. §13-5a-102, 103 and/or §13-5-14 and Utah Common Law)
`
`23.
`
`Freightlink hereby incorporates by this reference each and every
`
`preceding allegation as if set forth fully herein.
`
`24. Freightlink owns all right, title and interest in and to the mark of
`
`the ‘331 Registration.
`
`Complaint for Trademark Infringement
`Freightlink Inc. v. Uber Freight Link
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00051-BSJ Document 2 Filed 01/22/21 PageID.6 Page 5 of 7
`
`
`
`
`25. Uber has engaged in unfair methods of competition by intentionally
`
`infringing one or more claims of the ‘331 Registration for the FREIGHTLINK mark.
`
`26. Uber offers shipping and transportation services with the FREIGHTLINK mark
`
`that infringes one or more claims of the ‘331 Registration in an effort to pass off its shipping and
`
`transportation services as those sold by Freightlink.
`
`27. Upon information and belief, Uber knew that use of the FREIGHTLINK mark
`
`directly infringes the Freightlink’s rights granted by the ‘331 Registration.
`
`28. By engaging in the above-described activities, Uber has engaged in
`
`unfair competition under U.C.A. §13-5a-102 and 103, and under Utah common law.
`
`29. Freightlink has suffered actual damages as a result of unfair business practices
`
`by Uber in an amount to be proven at trial. Additionally, the harm to Freightlink arising from
`
`these acts by Uber is not fully compensable by money damages. Freightlink has suffered, and
`
`continues to suffer, irreparable harm that has no adequate remedy at law and that will
`
`continue unless this unfair conduct by Uber is preliminarily and permanently enjoined.
`
`Furthermore, Freightlink is entitled to its attorneys’ fees and costs.
`
`THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`(Unjust Enrichment)
`30. Freightlink hereby incorporates by this reference each and every preceding
`
`allegation as if set forth fully herein.
`
`31. Uber has benefited from the improper, unfair, and unauthorized use of the
`
`FREIGHTLINK mark as alleged herein.
`
`32. Uber knew or should have known of and fully appreciated the benefits it has
`
`received from Freightlink as a result of its actions.
`
`33. Uber would be unjustly enriched if it were permitted to retain the proceeds
`
`Complaint for Trademark Infringement
`Freightlink Inc. v. Uber Freight Link
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00051-BSJ Document 2 Filed 01/22/21 PageID.7 Page 6 of 7
`
`
`
`obtained from such actions.
`
`34. Equity and good conscience require that Uber be required to account for and
`
`pay to Freightlink an amount equal to value of the benefits conferred upon it.
`
`WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that the Court enter judgment in favor of
`
`Freightlink as follows:
`
`A.
`
`That the Court enter judgment that Uber has infringed the FREIGHTLINK
`
`mark in violation of the rights granted by the ‘331 Registration.
`
`B.
`
`That Uber be ordered to pay damages to Freightlink, together with interest, in
`
`an amount to be determined by this Court but in no event less than $100,000.
`
`C.
`
`That the Court award Freightlink treble damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §284
`
`and 15 U.S.C. §1117.
`
`D.
`
`That the Court award Freightlink its costs and attorney’s fees related to this
`
`action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §285, 15 U.S.C. §1117, U.C.A. §13-5a-102 and 103, and
`
`U.C.A. §13-5-14.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`That the Court award Freightlink prejudgment interest.
`
`That Freightlink have such other and further relief as shall seem just and
`
`proper to the Court.
`
`G.
`
`That the Court grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining Uber,
`
`its officers, directors, principals, agents, servants, employees, retailers, distributors,
`
`successors and assigns, and all other aiding, abetting, or acting in concert or active
`
`participation therewith, from directly or indirectly infringing the trademark in suit.
`
`H.
`
`Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Freightlink
`
`hereby demands a jury trial on all its claims and issues so triable.
`
`
`
`Complaint for Trademark Infringement
`Freightlink Inc. v. Uber Freight Link
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00051-BSJ Document 2 Filed 01/22/21 PageID.8 Page 7 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATED: January 22, 2021.
`
`/s/ Angilee K. Dakic__________
`Angilee K. Dakic
`PEARSON BUTLER, PLLC
`
`Attorney for Plaintiff
`Freightlink, Inc.
`
`Complaint for Trademark Infringement
`Freightlink Inc. v. Uber Freight Link
`
`12
`
`