`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 1 of 15
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
`AT SEATTLE
`
`
`Case No.
`
`FEDERAL COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF,
`AND OTHER RELIEF BASED ON
`TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT,
`TRADEMARK DILUTION, UNFAIR
`COMPETITION, AND UNJUST
`ENRICHMENT
`JURY DEMAND
`
`
`)))))))))))))
`
`
`)
`
`
`RICELAND FOODS, INC.,
`
`
`v.
`
`RICELAND TRADING, LTD d/b/a
`RICELAND FOODS LTD, and
`WISMETTAC ASIAN FOODS INC. d/b/a
`SEASIA,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Riceland Foods, Inc., an Arkansas corporation (or “Plaintiff” or “Riceland”), by
`
`and through its undersigned Counsel, files this Complaint against Defendants Riceland Trading,
`Ltd d/b/a Riceland Foods, Ltd (“Riceland Trading”) and Wismettac Asian Foods Inc., d/b/a
`SEASIA (“Wismettac”) (each a “Defendant” and collectively, the “Defendants”). In support of
`its Complaint, Plaintiff alleges as follows:
`This is an action under the Trademark Laws of the United States, Title 15 U.S.C.
`1.
`§§ 1051, et seq., for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and dilution pursuant to the
`Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1125(a) and (c), respectively. In addition this is an action,
`for trademark infringement, dilution and unfair competition, in violation of the common law and
`the statutes of the state of Washington.
`
`COMPLAINT - 1
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 2 of 15
`
`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
`
`In an attempt to legitimatize their unauthorized activities, the Defendants market
`2.
`and sell counterfeit and potentially hazardous rice products using the Plaintiff’s trademarks
`without authorization, thereby creating consumer confusion as to whether such products are
`affiliated, endorsed, and/or sponsored by the Plaintiff. Alternatively, Defendants are using the
`Plaintiff’s trademarks without authorization on competing and related rice products. The
`Defendants’ actions, as detailed below, maliciously tread upon the goodwill of the Riceland
`brand and have harmed and continue to harm the Plaintiff. Consequently, Plaintiff seeks
`damages, equitable relief including a preliminary and permanent injunction against the
`Defendants, and reimbursement of its attorneys’ fees and costs.
`PARTIES
`Plaintiff Riceland Foods, Inc. is a cooperative cooperation organized under the
`3.
`laws of the state of Arkansas, with its principal place of business in Stuttgart, Arkansas. Plaintiff
`is an exporter of rice and other grains, rice products, lecithin and vegetable oil.
`Upon information and belief, Riceland Trading is a foreign corporation in
`4.
`Bangkok, Thailand, with its principal place of business at 33rd Floor Sinn Sathorn Tower,
`77/140 Krungthonburi Rd. Bangkok, Thailand 10600.
`Upon information and belief, Wismettac (formerly Nishimoto Trading Co., Ltd.),
`5.
`is a Washington corporation, with its principal place of business at 19931 72nd Ave. S, Ste 101,
`Kent, WA, 98032, within this judicial district.
`Upon information and belief, SEASIA is an active trade name for Wismettac.
`6.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1338 as this civil action arises under
`7.
`an Act of Congress related to trademarks. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367
`and the doctrine of pendent jurisdiction over the state law claims as substantial and so related to
`the claims arising under federal law that they form part of the same case and controversy under
`Article III of the United States Constitution.
`
`COMPLAINT - 2
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 3 of 15
`
`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
`
`This Court may exercise jurisdiction over the Defendants because the causes of
`8.
`action alleged herein arose in whole or in part in Washington. Upon information and belief, the
`Defendants are providing, advertising, selling, and/or offering to sell goods and services bearing
`the infringing RICELAND Marks and, upon information and belief, have made sales in this
`judicial district.
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) on the ground that
`9.
`the infringing acts alleged herein arose, in whole or in part, within this judicial district.
`BACKGROUND FACTS
`PLAINTIFF’S BUSINESS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
`I.
`Plaintiff is the world’s largest miller and marketer of rice, as well as a distributor
`10.
`of agricultural products, including rice, for human consumption.1
`Plaintiff owns all right, title, and interest in and to the mark “RICELAND,” and
`11.
`has obtained Federal Trademark and Service Mark Registrations for the mark “RICELAND”
`for a wide range of food and other products, including, inter alia, rice products, namely, rice
`flour, rice bran and rice mixes; oil, vegetable oil, rice oil, shortening and dried beans. Plaintiff’s
`Federal Trademark and Service Mark Registrations for the mark “RICELAND” include the
`following word and design marks registered on the Principal Register of the United States Patent
`and Trademark Office, all but two of which are incontestable pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1065:
`
`
`Reg. No.
`U.S. Reg. No.
`2,552,665
`
`Reg. Date
`March 26, 2002
`
`Mark
`RICELAND
`
`Goods
`Classes
`Classes 29, 30 Oil, namely,
`vegetable oil and
`rice oil;
`shortening.
`
`Rice; rice
`products, namely,
`rice flour and rice
`bran; and rice
`mixes.
`
`
`1
`Inc. Website
`Foods,
`Riceland
`See About
`Riceland,
`available
`https://www.riceland.com/pages/about-riceland/ (Last Accessed, April 6, 2020).
`COMPLAINT - 3
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`at
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 4 of 15
`
`RICELAND
`
`Class 29
`
`Dried beans
`
`U.S. Reg. No.
`5,507,521
`U.S. Reg. No.
`1,913,625
`
`U.S. Reg. No.
`442,236
`
`U.S. Reg. No.
`1,067,790
`
`July 3, 2008
`
`August 22, 1995
`
`March 15, 1949
`
`June 14, 1977
`
`U.S. Reg. No.
`5,508,644
`
`July 3, 2018
`
`Class 30
`
`Rice
`
`Class 30
`
`Rice
`
`Class 43
`
`Classes 29, 30 Vegetable
`shortening and
`soybean salad and
`cooking oils;
`Rice.
`Mobile café
`services for
`providing food
`and drink;
`Providing of food
`and drink via a
`mobile truck.
`
`RICELAND
`(AND DESIGN)
`(BLACK &
`WHITE)
`
`RICELAND
`(STYLIZED)
`
`
`RICELAND
`FOODS
`
`RICELAND
`MOBILE CAFÉ
`FAMILY
`FARMER
`OWNED (AND
`DESIGN)
`
`
`RICELAND
`PERFECTED
`RICE
`
`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
`
`Class 30
`
`Rice
`
`U.S. Reg. No.
`2,025,242
`
`December 24,
`1996
`
`(collectively, the “RICELAND Marks”).
`Plaintiff is also the sole and exclusive owner of common law trademark rights for
`12.
`RICELAND. For example, Plaintiff uses the aforementioned trademarks in-state commerce for
`Washington State and has done so since at least 2005.
`Plaintiff owns all right, title, and interest in and to the mark “RICELAND” in
`13.
`various countries around the world, including, inter alia, Canada, China, Panama, and Taiwan.
`
`COMPLAINT - 4
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 5 of 15
`
`A list of countries where Plaintiff has registrations for the RICELAND Marks, among others, is
`attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`Plaintiff has used several of the RICELAND Marks continuously and exclusively
`14.
`in interstate commerce since at least 1946. The Marks have been used variously on and with
`labeling and packaging of food and in advertising and promotional material. Examples of the
`RICELAND Marks used in advertising throughout the years are included below.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff ships its rice and rice products bearing the RICELAND Marks in various
`15.
`different sizes, including several that are sized primarily for consumers. Plaintiff uses other sized
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT - 5
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 6 of 15
`
`packaging as well, including packaging that comes in twenty-five (25) and fifty (50) pound unit
`increments. Since August 1, 2019, Plaintiff has shipped 233,433 of these larger units, or over
`10,000,000 pounds of rice throughout the Northwest region of the United States, including in
`the states of Oregon and Washington.
`In or around March 2020, Plaintiff became aware of a foreign market reaction due
`16.
`to the global COVID-19 pandemic. Upon information and belief, COVID-19 caused an increase
`in demand for rice and rice products. As a result, grocery stores and other retail distributors have
`seen their shelves containing rice product and rice supplies emptied due to mass consumer
`“hoarding.”2
`Upon information and belief, many stores in the Northwest and West coast
`17.
`regions, including some of the Plaintiff’s own customers, may have shortages and high demand
`for rice in the weeks and months to come as markets struggle to fill market holes caused by
`COVID-19.
`II. DEFENDANTS’ BUSINESSES AND INFRINGING ACTIVITIES
`According to Defendant Riceland Trading’s website, Defendant was established
`18.
`in 1982 and is a leading rice exporter in Thailand.3
`According to Defendant Wismettac’s website, Defendant was established in
`19.
`Kobe, Japan in 1912 and is “one of the oldest and most experienced importer, wholesaler and
`distributor of Asian food products in North America.”4
`
`
`2 See, e.g., Su-Lin Tan and Amanda Lee, Coronavirus will not cause global rice shortage unless
`panic buying and export bans persist, South China Morning Post, available at
`https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3077793/coronavirus-will-not-cause-
`global-rice-shortage-unless-panic (Published Apr. 1, 2020; Last Accessed, July 29, 2020);
`‘We’ve never sold out of pork butt before’: Inside 22 L.A. grocery stores , Los Angeles Times,
`available at https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-03-13/coronavirus-grocery-stores
`(Published Mar. 13, 2020; Last Accessed July 29, 2020) (stating that as the number of cases
`continues to increase, shoppers have flocked to stores to stock up on shelf-stable items ranging
`from frozen foods and canned goods to rice and bread).
`3 See About Us, Riceland Foods LTD, available at http://www.riceland.co.th/engabout.htm (Last
`Accessed, July 29, 2020).
`4 See About, Wismettac Asian Foods, Inc., available at http://www.wismettacusa.com/about/#1
`(Last Accessed, July 29, 2020).
`COMPLAINT - 6
`
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 7 of 15
`
`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
`
`Recently Plaintiff became aware of Defendants infringing use of the RICELAND
`
`20.
`Marks.
`Upon information and belief, in or about March 2020, Defendants began
`21.
`marketing, selling and offering to sell rice in packaging bearing the RICELAND Marks (the
`“Counterfeit Rice”). Since March 2020, Defendants have sold seventy (70) units of fifty (50)
`pound bags of rice, or at least three thousand, five hundred (3,500) pounds of Counterfeit Rice
`to retail outlets in the Washington region and have, according to customer tracking information,
`sold these bags of rice to consumers. A copy of the Defendants’ infringing use of the
`RICELAND Marks, i.e., the Counterfeit Rice, is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Riceland Trading imports the Counterfeit
`22.
`Rice to Defendant Wismettac at 19931 72nd Ave. S, Ste 101, Kent, WA, 98032.
`Upon information and belief, Defendants are using the RICELAND Marks to sell
`23.
`Counterfeit Rice in order to fill rice shortages caused by COVID-19 in the Washington region.5
`Upon information and belief, Defendants are using and will continue to use the
`24.
`Plaintiff’s brand and goodwill as a trusted United States rice manufacturer to circumvent the
`health and environmental standards imposed on foreign agricultural exporters. Thus, the
`marketing and sale of Defendants’ Counterfeit Rice and use of the RICELAND Marks also pose
`a serious health risk to the general public.6
`
`5 See, e.g., Rajendra Jadhav, Naveen Thukral, and Nigel Hunt, Reuters, Coronavirus Upends
`Shock,
`at
`Global
`Food
`Supply Chains
`in
`Latest
`Economic
`available
`https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-food-supplies-insi/coronavirus-upends-
`global-food-supply-chains-in-latest-economic-shock-idUSKBN21L2V7 (Published Apr. 3,
`2020; Last Accessed July 29, 2020) (noting that Thailand, the second-largest rice exporter and
`where the Defendant is located, is taking advantage of higher rice prices caused by COVID-19
`by increasing exports from stockpiles); Alexandra Kelley, Prices on Some Food Items Are
`Surging During Coronavirus Pandemic, The Hill, available at https://thehill.com/changing-
`america/sustainability/environment/490331-wheat-rice-prices-surge-as-consumers-stock-up
`(Published Mar. 31, 2020; Last Accessed July 29, 2020) (stating that Americans are poised to
`see a spike in prices and demand for rice).
`6 Although COVID-19 is generally thought to be spread from person-to-person and there is
`currently no evidence to support transmission associated with food, health officials are still
`learning about COVID-19. There have been widespread instances concerning mass infection of
`persons who work in food production and processing and the Centers for Disease Control and
`Prevention (“CDC”) have issued food safety guidelines. See, e.g., Hugh Bronstein, Argentina
`Suspends Exports From Eight Meat Plants To China After COVID-19 Found, Reuters, available
`COMPLAINT - 7
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 8 of 15
`
`The health and food safety practices employed by Defendants’ in the creation,
`25.
`processing, and distribution of the Counterfeit Rice are unknown. Accordingly, it is imperative
`that Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks during the global pandemic are curbed
`immediately.
`The unauthorized use of the RICELAND Marks directly infringes on the family
`26.
`of RICELAND trademarks owned by Plaintiff. Upon information and belief, the Counterfeit
`Rice has been shipped into the United States (and this judicial district) from South Korea, China,
`Thailand, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, and Bermuda. The
`RICELAND Marks are recorded with United States Customs and Border Protection.
`As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ infringement of Plaintiff’s
`27.
`RICELAND Marks, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer great damage and
`irreparable harm that cannot fully be compensated or measured in money. Plaintiff is thereby
`entitled to injunctive relief against Defendants, as well as all other remedies available under the
`Lanham Act including, without limitation, damages in an amount to be proven at trial, statutory
`penalties, disgorgement of Defendants’ profits, and costs and attorneys’ fees.
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`FEDERAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT, 15 U.S.C. § 1114
`Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 27, inclusive, of this Complaint
`28.
`and by this reference incorporates the same as though fully set forth herein.
`Plaintiff holds United States registered trademarks for the RICELAND Marks
`29.
`which are in full force, effective and enforceable.
`
`
`at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-argentina-meat/argentina-halts-china-
`six-meat-plants-exports-after-covid-19-found-idUSKCN24G2TQ (Published July 15, 2020;
`Last Accessed July 29, 2020) (discussing Argentina’s suspension of exports after coronavirus
`cases emerged among employees in food plants); Coronavirus Disease 2019 Food Safety, Centers
`for Disease Control and Prevention available at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-
`ncov/daily-life-coping/food-and-COVID-19.html (Last Updated June 25, 2020; Last Accessed
`July 29, 2020).
`COMPLAINT - 8
`
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 9 of 15
`
`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
`
`The Defendants are, without consent or authorization, intentionally and
`30.
`knowingly using, reproducing, manufacturing, marketing, displaying and/or distributing, in
`interstate commerce, Counterfeit Rice bearing Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks.
`The Defendants are, without consent and in bad faith, using and reproducing in
`31.
`interstate commerce Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks to bolster the sales of their infringing
`Counterfeit Rice, thereby misappropriating the goodwill associated with the Plaintiff’s brand.
`Alternatively, the Defendants are using and reproducing in interstate commerce
`32.
`Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks without authorization to bolster the sales of their own rice
`products, thereby misappropriating the goodwill associated with the Plaintiff’s brand.
`The Defendants’ conduct has caused and continues to cause, damage and injury
`33.
`to Plaintiff’s brand, goodwill and reputation.
`In manufacturing, marketing, offering to sell, and selling Counterfeit Rice, the
`34.
`Defendants’ copy, reproduce, and in some instances, remove, Plaintiff’s trademark and
`copyright notices.
`The Lanham Act defines a “counterfeit” as “a spurious mark which is identical to,
`35.
`or substantially indistinguishable from, a registered mark.” 15 U.S.C. §1127. Indeed the
`designation that appears on the Defendants’ products are “counterfeit,” and implemented in the
`same manner as the RICELAND Marks appear on genuine Riceland merchandise. As such,
`likelihood of confusion is presumed.
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks, which are identical to Plaintiff’s
`36.
`federally registered marks and used on identical, albeit non-genuine goods, constitute the use of
`a counterfeit mark under 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d).
`The Defendants are engaged in the creation, marketing, sale and distribution of
`37.
`counterfeit rice products bearing the RICELAND Marks. The Defendants’ conduct thus
`constitutes trademark infringement in violation of § 32(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §
`1114(1).
`
`COMPLAINT - 9
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 10 of 15
`
`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
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION/FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN,
`15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)
`Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 37, inclusive, of this Complaint
`38.
`and by this reference incorporates the same as though fully set forth herein.
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks in commerce, is a false
`39.
`designation of origin, a false or misleading description of fact, or a false or misleading
`representation of fact.
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks is likely to cause confusion or to
`40.
`cause mistake, or to deceive as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Plaintiff’s goods,
`services, and/or commercial activities.
`The Defendants’ conduct violates 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
`41.
`42.
`The Defendants’ conduct has caused damage to Plaintiff. The Defendants’
`conduct will cause further irreparable injury to Plaintiff if it is not restrained by this Court from
`further violation of Plaintiff’s intellectual property rights.
`Plaintiff’s remedy at law is not by itself adequate. Plaintiff has suffered, and
`43.
`continues to suffer, irreparable harm such that Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief.
`Accordingly, the Defendants’ conduct constitutes unfair competition pursuant to
`44.
`15 U.S.C. § 1125.
`The Defendants’ bad faith violations of 15 U.S.C. § 1125 also entitles Plaintiff to
`45.
`an Order from the Court directing the forfeiture and seizure of the Counterfeit Rice.
`Plaintiff is therefore entitled to injunctive relief under 15 U.S.C. § 1116 and
`46.
`recovery of damages from the Defendants pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117.
`THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`DILUTION, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)
`Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 46, inclusive, of this Complaint
`47.
`and by this reference incorporates the same as though fully set forth herein.
`
`COMPLAINT - 10
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 11 of 15
`
`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
`
`Plaintiff is the owner of the famous registered trademark RICELAND. The mark
`48.
`is inherently distinctive and has acquired distinctiveness through long and continuous use. The
`extent of advertising and publicity associated with the RICELAND Marks is such that it is well
`known throughout a substantial portion of the United States.
`Plaintiff’s long, continuous and extensive use of the RICELAND Marks has
`49.
`caused the RICELAND Marks to become famous, as defined under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks began on or around March 2020
`50.
`well after Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks became famous. Upon information and belief, the
`Defendants’ are passing off non-genuine product as Plaintiff’s, and distributing Counterfeit Rice
`to Washington State and other retailers and grocers in the Northwest region.
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks dilutes the distinctive value of
`51.
`Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks by lessening the capacity of Plaintiff to identify and distinguish
`its goods and services from those of others.
`The Defendants’ unknown health and food safety measures during production and
`52.
`distribution of a sought-after food product at the height of a global pandemic endangers public
`health.
`The Defendants’ precarious use of the RICELAND Marks at the height of a global
`53.
`pandemic also puts Plaintiff’s brand and goodwill in danger.
`The Defendants’ deliberate and willful violation of Plaintiff’s rights in the
`54.
`RICELAND Marks have caused and will continue to cause damages to Plaintiff, as well as to
`the reputation associated with Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks.
`Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to
`55.
`suffer, irreparable harm such that Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief.
`Accordingly, the Defendants’ conduct constitutes dilution pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
`56.
`§ 1125.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT - 11
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 12 of 15
`
`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
`
`FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`UNFAIR COMPETITION IN VIOLATION OF WASHINGTON COMMON LAW
`Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 56, inclusive, of this Complaint
`57.
`and by this reference incorporates the same as though fully set forth herein.
`The RICELAND Marks are wholly associated with Plaintiff due to its long use
`58.
`thereof, and as such, Plaintiff is deserving of having its mark adequately protected with respect
`to the conduct of its business.
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks comprise unfair competition in
`59.
`that customers and would-be customers are likely to be confused concerning the origin of
`products using the same or similar marks in the marketplace.
`The Defendants’ aforesaid acts are in violation of federal and state law,
`60.
`specifically RCW 19.86.020.
`Plaintiff has no remedy at law. Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer
`61.
`irreparable harm such that Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief.
`Additionally, the Defendants have profited from their wrongful acts and must
`62.
`disgorge their ill-gotten gains.
`FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT IN VIOLATION OF WASHINGTON STATE LAW
`Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 62, inclusive, of this Complaint
`63.
`and by this reference incorporates the same as though fully set forth herein.
`The Defendants are, without consent or authorization, intentionally and
`64.
`knowingly using, reproducing, manufacturing, marketing, displaying and/or distributing, in
`interstate commerce, Counterfeit Rice bearing Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks.
`The Defendants are, without consent and in bad faith, using and reproducing in
`65.
`interstate commerce Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks to bolster the sales of their infringing
`Counterfeit Rice, thereby misappropriating the goodwill associated with the Plaintiff’s brand.
`The Defendants’ conduct has caused and continues to cause, damage and injury
`66.
`to Plaintiff's brand, goodwill and reputation.
`
`COMPLAINT - 12
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 13 of 15
`
`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
`
`In manufacturing, marketing, offering to sell, and selling Counterfeit Rice, the
`67.
`Defendants’ copy, reproduce, and in some instances, remove, Plaintiff’s trademark and
`copyright notices.
`The Defendants’ aforesaid acts are in violation of federal and state law,
`68.
`specifically RCW 19.77.140.
`SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`DILUTION IN VIOLATION OF WASHINGTON STATE LAW
`Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 68, inclusive, of this Complaint
`69.
`and by this reference incorporates the same as though fully set forth herein.
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks began on or around March 2020
`70.
`well after Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks became famous. Upon information and belief, the
`Defendants are passing off non-genuine product as Riceland’s Rice, and selling potentially
`hazardous Counterfeit Rice, to Washington retailers for distribution among the general public.
`The Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks dilutes the distinctive value of
`71.
`Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks by lessening the capacity of Plaintiff to identify and distinguish
`its goods and services from those of others. The Defendants’ precarious use of the RICELAND
`Marks at the height of a global pandemic also puts Plaintiff’s brand and goodwill in danger.
`The Defendants’ deliberate and willful violation of Plaintiff’s rights in the
`72.
`RICELAND Marks have caused and will continue to cause damages to Plaintiff, as well as to
`the reputation associated with Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks.
`By their acts alleged herein, the Defendants are causing dilution of the distinctive
`73.
`quality of Plaintiff’s RICELAND Marks and injury to Plaintiff’s business reputation in violation
`of RCW 19.77.160.
`SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`UNJUST ENRICHMENT
`
`Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 73, inclusive, of this Complaint
`74.
`and by this reference incorporates the same as though fully set forth herein.
`
`COMPLAINT - 13
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 14 of 15
`
`Since at least as early as March 2020, the Defendants have been selling
`75.
`Counterfeit Rice without authorization using a false designation—the Plaintiff’s RICELAND
`Marks.
`As a result of the Defendants’ aforementioned unlawful acts, the Defendants have
`76.
`had a financial benefit conferred upon them and are thereby unjustly enriched. It is inequitable
`for the Defendants to retain those benefits and they should be disgorged of any profits.
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:
`a. Awarding Plaintiff recovery of up to three times the Defendants’ profits and damages
`for the Defendants’ use of the RICELAND Marks in connection with the sale of
`Counterfeit Rice pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117;
`b. Awarding Plaintiff statutory damages as allowed by law;
`c. Awarding prejudgment and post judgment interest at the maximum rate allowed by
`law;
`d. Directing an accounting of all Counterfeit Rice that was or is within the Defendants’
`possession, custody, or control;
`e. Directing an Order pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116 providing for the seizure,
`impoundment, and destruction of all Counterfeit Rice within the Defendants’ custody,
`possession, or control;
`f. Enjoining the Defendants from further use of the RICELAND Marks;
`g. Awarding Plaintiff restitution from the Defendants for unjust enrichment;
`h. Awarding Plaintiff its costs and attorney fees incurred in this action; and
`i. Granting such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and equitable, or
`to which Plaintiff may be entitled.
`
`//
`//
`//
`COMPLAINT - 14
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-01170 Document 1 Filed 07/31/20 Page 15 of 15
`
`JURY DEMAND
`Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal
`Rules of Civil Procedure.
`DATED: July 31, 2020
`
`___
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`
`By s/Barbara J. Duffy
`Barbara J. Duffy, WSBA No. 18885
`
`s/Aaron Schaer
`
`
`
`Aaron Schaer, WSBA No. 52122
`1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4200
`P.O. Box 91302
`Seattle, WA 98111-9402
`Telephone: 206.223.7000
`Facsimile: 206.223.7107
`Email: duffyb@lanepowell.com
`Email: schaera@lanepowell.com
`
`
`DENTONS US LLP
`
`By s/Samuel Fifer
`Samuel Fifer, pro hac vice pending
`
` s/Taaj M. Reaves
`Taaj M. Reaves, pro hac vice pending
`233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 5900
`Chicago, Illinois 60606
`Telephone (312) 876-8000
`Facsimile (312) 876-7934
`samuel.fifer@dentons.com
`taaj.reaves@dentons.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Riceland Foods, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT - 15
`
`
`133302.0001/8131640.1
`
`LANE POWELL PC
`1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4200
`P.O. BOX 91302
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-9402
`206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107
`
`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
`
`