UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI DIVISION 

CASE NO.: 1:22-cv-23321-KMW 

CREELED, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

THE INDIVIDUALS, PARTNERSHIPS AND 

UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS 

IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE “A,” 

 Defendants. 

 / 

AMENDED COMPLAINT1

Plaintiff, CreeLED, Inc. (“CreeLED”), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby sues 

Defendants, the Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations identified in the 

caption, which are set forth on Schedule “A” hereto (collectively, the “Defendants”), and allege as 

follows: 

NATURE OF THE ACTION 

1. Defendants are promoting, selling, reproducing, offering for sale, and distributing 

goods using counterfeits and confusingly similar imitations of Plaintiff’s trademarks within this 

district through various Internet based e-commerce stores and fully interactive commercial Internet 

1 The foreign website identified in Plaintiff’s Motion to Temporarily Proceed Under a 

Pseudonym (ECF No. 5) has recently identified Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s efforts to enforce the 

trademarks asserted herein. See www.sellerdefense.cn. Accordingly the relief requested by 

Plaintiff’s Motion is no longer required. 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 1 of 23
2 

websites operating under the seller identification names set forth on Schedule “A” hereto (the 

“Seller IDs”).2

 

2. Like many other famous trademark owners, Plaintiff suffers ongoing daily and 

sustained violations of their trademark rights at the hands of counterfeiters and infringers, such as 

Defendants herein, who wrongfully reproduce and counterfeit Plaintiff’s trademarks for the twin 

purposes of (i) duping and confusing the consuming public and (ii) earning substantial profits. The 

natural and intended byproduct of Defendants’ actions is the erosion and destruction of the 

goodwill associated with Plaintiff’s trademarks, as well as the destruction of the legitimate market 

sector in which they operate. 

3. In order to combat the indivisible harm caused by the combined actions of 

Defendants and others engaging in similar conduct, Plaintiff has expended significant amounts of 

resources in connection with trademark enforcement efforts, including legal fees, investigative 

fees, and support mechanisms for law enforcement. The exponential growth of counterfeiting over 

the Internet, particularly through online marketplace platforms, has created an environment that 

requires individuals, such as Plaintiff, to expend significant time and money across a wide 

spectrum of efforts in order to protect both consumers and themselves from the negative effects of 

confusion and the erosion of the goodwill connected to Plaintiff’s brand. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2

 Pursuant to this Court’s Order granting Plaintiff’s request to file certain motions under 

seal (ECF No. 11), Schedule “A” to the Amended Complaint has been filed under seal as an exhibit 

to Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Order to 

Restrain Transfer of Assets (ECF No. 6). If the Court is inclined to grant Plaintiff’s request for a 

Temporary Restraining Order, Plaintiff will promptly request that the Clerk unseal Schedule A 

(along with all other sealed ewdocket entries in this matter) once the Defendant’s assets have been 

restrained. 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 2 of 23
3 

4. This is an action seeking damages and injunctive relief for trademark counterfeiting 

and infringement, false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, common law unfair 

competition; common law trademark infringement pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1116, 1121, 

1125(a), and 1125(d), and The All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a); 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq. 

5. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 

1125(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1121 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. 

6. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 over the state law 

claims, because the claims are so related to the trademark claims in this action, over which this 

Court has original jurisdiction, that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article 

III of the United States Constitution. 

7. Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this District because they direct 

business activities toward and conduct business with consumers throughout the United States, 

including within the State of Florida and this District through at least the Internet based ecommerce stores and fully interactive commercial Internet websites accessible in Florida and 

operating under the Seller IDs. Upon information and belief, Defendants infringe Plaintiff’s 

trademarks in this District by advertising, using, selling, promoting and distributing counterfeit 

trademark goods through such Internet based e-commerce stores and fully interactive commercial 

Internet websites. 

8. Venue is proper in this District pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1391 since Defendants are, 

upon information and belief, aliens engaged in infringing activities and causing harm within this 

District by advertising, offering to sell, selling and/or shipping infringing products into this 

District. Defendants may be found in this District, as they are subject to personal jurisdiction 

herein. 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 3 of 23
4 

THE PLAINTIFF

9. Plaintiff is a corporation having its principal place of business in Durham, North 

Carolina. 

10. Plaintiff is the owners of all rights, title, and interest in several federally registered 

trademarks (the “CreeLED Marks”). 

11. High-quality products under the CreeLED Marks are designed, marketed, and 

distributed in interstate commerce, including within this judicial district. 

12. CreeLED, through its predecessor Cree, Inc., has a 30-year track record of 

innovations and industry firsts driven by its investment and focus on R&D. CreeLED’s rich 

heritage in technology and innovation has distinguished it as one of the industry’s strongest LED 

brands. Today, CreeLED specializes in delivering a broad portfolio of high-performance LED 

chips and components. CreeLED’s contributions to LED development and design serve as the 

basis for Cree LED’s expansive portfolio of over 1,700 patents and 1,100 trademarks worldwide. 

 13. CreeLED is a market-leading innovator of high-performance LED chips and 

components with over 125M LED products sold since 2008. CreeLED has over 1,600 employees 

at various product development, manufacturing, and sales locations including the U.S., Hon Kong, 

and China. CreeLED’s annual revenue is approximately $525 million with assets valued at over 

3 billion. 

14. Goods bearing and reproducing the CreeLED Marks are sold through authorized 

retailers throughout the United States, including within the State of Florida and this District. 

Genuine and authorized products bearing and reproducing the CreeLED Marks are widely 

legitimately advertised, promoted, and distributed by and through Plaintiff’s and their authorized 

partners, including but not limited to the following official online store and website: www.creeCase 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 4 of 23
5 

led.com/. Over the course of the past several years, visibility on the Internet, particularly via 

Internet search engines such as Google, Yahoo!, and Bing, has become increasingly important to 

Plaintiff’s overall marketing and consumer education efforts. Thus, Plaintiff expends significant 

monetary resources on Internet marketing and consumer education, including search engine 

optimization (“SEO”) strategies. Those strategies allow Plaintiff and its authorized partners to 

educate consumers fairly and legitimately about the value associated with the CreeLED brand. 

THE DEFENDANTS

15. Defendants are individuals and/or business entities of unknown makeup, each of 

whom, upon information and belief, either reside and/or operate in foreign jurisdictions, or 

redistribute products from the same or similar sources in those locations and/or ship their goods 

from the same or similar sources in those locations to shipping and fulfillment centers within the 

United States to redistribute their products from those locations. Defendants have the capacity to 

be sued pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(b). Defendants target their business 

activities towards consumers throughout the United States, including within this district through 

the operation of Internet based e-commerce stores via Internet marketplace websites under the 

Seller IDs. 

16. Defendants are the past and present controlling forces behind the sale of products 

under counterfeits and infringements of Plaintiff’s trademarks as described herein using at least 

the Seller IDs. 

17. Upon information and belief, Defendants directly engage in unfair competition by 

advertising, offering for sale, and selling goods bearing one or more of Plaintiff’s trademarks to 

consumers within the United States and this District through Internet based e-commerce stores 

using, at least, the Seller IDs and additional seller identification aliases and domain names not yet 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 5 of 23
6 

known to Plaintiff. Defendants have purposefully directed some portion of their illegal activities 

towards consumers in the State of Florida through the advertisement, offer to sell, sale, and/or 

shipment of counterfeit and infringing goods into the State. 

18. Defendants have registered, established or purchased, and maintained their Seller 

IDs. Upon information and belief, Defendants may have engaged in fraudulent conduct with 

respect to the registration of the Seller IDs. 

19. Upon information and belief, some Defendants have registered and/or maintained 

their Seller IDs for the sole purpose of engaging in illegal counterfeiting activities. 

20. Upon information and belief, Defendants will continue to register or acquire new 

seller identification aliases and domain names for the purpose of selling and offering for sale goods 

bearing counterfeit and confusingly similar imitations of one or more of Plaintiff’s trademarks 

unless preliminarily and permanently enjoined. 

21. Defendants use their Internet-based businesses in order to infringe the intellectual 

property rights of Plaintiff. 

22. Defendants’ business names, i.e., the Seller IDs, associated payment accounts, and 

any other alias seller identification names used in connection with the sale of counterfeit and 

infringing goods bearing one or more of Plaintiff’s trademarks are essential components of 

Defendants’ online activities and are one of the means by which Defendants further their 

counterfeiting and infringement scheme and cause harm to Plaintiff. Moreover, Defendants are 

using Plaintiff’s famous trademarks to drive Internet consumer traffic to their e-commerce stores 

operating under the Seller IDs, thereby increasing the value of the Seller IDs and decreasing the 

size and value of Plaintiff’s legitimate marketplace and intellectual property rights at Plaintiff’s 

expense. 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 6 of 23
7 

GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiff’s Intellectual Property Rights

23. Plaintiff is the owner of the following trademarks, which are valid and registered 

on the Principal Register of the United States Patent and Trademark Office: 

 Classes Trademark Registration No. 

1 09 Int. CREE 2,440,530 

2 42 Int. CREE 4,597,310 

3 35 Int. CREE 4,896,239 

4 39 Int. CREE 4,787,288 

5 09 Int. CREE 3,935,628 

6 11 Int. CREE 3,935,629 

7 40 Int. CREE 3,938,970 

8 42 Int. CREE 4,026,756 

9 09 Int. CREE 4,641,937 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 7 of 23
8 

10 37 Int. CREE 4,842,084 

11 09 Int., 41 Int. CREE 4,767,107 

12 09 Int., 11 Int., 35 

Int., 36 Int., 37 Int., 

39 Int., 40 Int., 41 

Int., 42 Int. 

CREE & Design 

(2D Trisected 

Diamond) 

6,091,202 

13 09 Int., 11 Int., 37 

Int., 39 Int. 

CREE & Design 

(2D Trisected 

Diamond) 

5566249 

14 09 Int. CREE & Design 

(solid) 

4,234,124 

15 11 Int. CREE & Design 

(solid) 

4,233,855 

16 37 Int. CREE & Design 

(solid) 

4933004 

17 09 Int., 41 Int. CREE & Design 

(solid) 

4771402 

18 42 Int. CREE & Design 

(solid) 

4,597,311 

19 09 Int. CREE & Design 

(striped) 

2,452,761 

20 09 Int. CREE & Design 

(striped) 

3,935,630 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 8 of 23
9 

21 42 Int. CREE & Design 

(striped) 

2,922,689 

22 09 Int. CREE Design - 

Diamond Design 

(Solid) 

2,504,194 

23 11 Int., 35 Int., 40 

Int. 

CREE Design 

(2D Trisected 

Diamond) 

6,315,812 

24 09 Int., 11 Int., 37 

Int., 39 Int., 41 Int., 

42 Int. 

CREE Design 

(2D Trisected 

Diamond) 

5,571,046 

25 09 Int. CREE Design 

(striped) 

3,998,141 

26 11 Int. CREE EDGE 5,745,621 

27 09 Int. CREE LED 

LIGHT & 

Design 

3,327,299 

28 09 Int., 11 Int. CREE LED 

LIGHTING 

3,891,765 

29 09 Int., 11 Int. CREE LED 

LIGHTING & 

Design 

3,891,756 

30 09 Int., 11 Int. CREE LEDS & 

Design (2D) 

5,846,029 

31 09 Int. CREE LEDS & 

Design (solid) 

3,360,315 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 9 of 23
10 

32 11 Int. CREE LEDS & 

Design (solid) 

4,558,924 

33 11 Int. CREE 

LIGHTING 

6,125,508 

34 37 Int., 39 Int., 41 

Int., 42 Int. 

CREE 

LIGHTING 

6,251,971 

35 11 Int. CREE 

LIGHTING & 

Design 

(horizontal) 

6,228,836 

36 37 Int., 39 Int., 41 

Int., 42 Int. 

CREE 

LIGHTING & 

Design 

(horizontal) 

6,234,496 

37 11 Int. CREE 

LIGHTING & 

Design (vertical) 

6,234,497 

38 09 Int. CREE 

TRUEWHITE 

4,029,469 

39 11 Int. CREE 

TRUEWHITE 

4,091,530 

40 09 Int. CREE 

TRUEWHITE 

TECHNOLOGY 

& Design (solid) 

5,022,755 

41 11 Int. CREE 

TRUEWHITE 

TECHNOLOGY 

& Design (solid) 

4,099,381 

42 11 Int. CREE 

TRUEWHITE 

TECHNOLOGY 

& Design 

(striped) 

4,286,398 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 10 of 23
11 

43 09 Int. CREE 

VENTURE 

LED 

COMPANY & 

Design 

(horizontal) 

5,852,185 

44 09 Int. CREE 

VENTURE 

LED 

COMPANY & 

Design (vertical) 

5,852,184 

45 09 Int. EASYWHITE 3,935,393 

46 11 Int. EASYWHITE 4,060,563 

47 42 Int. EASYWHITE 4,384,225 

48 09 Int. EZBRIGHT 3,357,336 

49 09 Int. GSIC 2,012,686 

50 09 Int. J SERIES 5,852,400 

51 09 Int. MEGABRIGHT 2,650,523 

52 09 Int. RAZERTHIN 2,861,793 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 11 of 23
12 

53 09 Int. SC3 

TECHNOLOGY 

(stylized) 

4,502,559 

54 09 Int. SC5 

TECHNOLOGY 

5,256,643 

55 9 Int. SCREEN 

MASTER 

5,067,029 

56 09 Int., 11 Int. TRUEWHITE 3,812,287 

57 09 Int. TRUEWHITE 

TECHNOLOGY 

& Design 

3,888,281 

58 11 Int. TRUEWHITE 

TECHNOLOGY 

& Design 

3,888,282 

59 09 Int. ULTRATHIN 4,110,443 

60 09 Int. XBRIGHT 2,644,422 

61 09 Int. XLAMP 3,014,910 

62 09 Int. XM-L 5,294,417 

63 09 Int. XTHIN 2,861,792 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 12 of 23
13 

24. The CreeLED Marks are used in connection with the design, marketing, and 

distribution of high-quality goods in at least the categories identified above. 

25. Long before Defendants began their infringing activities complained of herein, the 

CreeLED Marks had been used by Plaintiff in interstate commerce to identify and distinguish 

Plaintiff’s products and merchandise for an extended period. 

26. The CreeLED Marks are well-known and famous and have been for many years. 

Plaintiff has expended substantial time, money, and other resources developing, advertising, and 

otherwise promoting the CreeLED Marks and products bearing the CreeLED Marks. The 

CreeLED Marks qualify as famous marks as that term is used in 15 U.S.C. §1125(c)(1). 

27. Plaintiff has extensively used, advertised, and promoted the CreeLED Marks in the 

United States in association with their merchandise. 

28. As a result of Plaintiff’s efforts, members of the consuming public readily identify 

products and merchandise bearing or sold under the CreeLED Marks as being high quality goods 

sponsored and approved by Plaintiff. 

29. The CreeLED Marks serve as a symbol of Plaintiff’s quality, reputation, and 

goodwill and have never been abandoned. 

Defendants’ Counterfeiting and Infringing Conduct

30. Upon information and belief, Defendants are promoting and advertising, 

distributing, selling, and/or offering for sale counterfeit and infringing goods in interstate 

commerce using exact copies and confusingly similar copies of the CreeLED Marks through at 

least the Internet based e-commerce stores operating under the Seller IDs (collectively, the 

“Counterfeit Goods”). Plaintiff has used the CreeLED Marks extensively and continuously before 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 13 of 23
14 

Defendants began offering counterfeit and confusingly similar imitations of Plaintiff’s 

merchandise. 

31. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ Counterfeit Goods are of a quality 

substantially and materially different than that of Plaintiff’s genuine goods. Defendants, upon 

information and belief, are actively using, promoting and otherwise advertising, distributing, 

selling and/or offering for sale substantial quantities of their Counterfeit Goods with the knowledge 

and intent that such goods will be mistaken for the genuine high quality goods offered for sale by 

Plaintiff under the CreeLED Marks despite Defendants’ knowledge that they are without authority 

to use the CreeLED Marks. The effect of Defendants’ actions will cause confusion of consumers, 

at the time of initial interest, sale, and in the post-sale setting, who will believe Defendants’ 

Counterfeit Goods are genuine goods originating from, associated with, or approved by Plaintiff. 

32. Defendants advertise their Counterfeit Goods for sale to the consuming public via 

e-commerce stores on Internet marketplace websites using at least the Seller IDs. In so advertising 

these goods, Defendants improperly and unlawfully use the CreeLED Marks without Plaintiff’s 

permission. 

33. As part of their overall infringement and counterfeiting scheme, Defendants are, 

upon information and belief, employing and benefitting from substantially similar, advertising and 

marketing strategies based, in large measure, upon an illegal use of counterfeits and infringements 

of the CreeLED Marks. Specifically, Defendants are using counterfeits and infringements of 

Plaintiff’s famous CreeLED Marks in order to make their e-commerce stores and websites selling 

illegal goods appear more relevant, authentic, and attractive to consumers searching for Plaintiff’s 

related goods and information online. By their actions, Defendants are contributing to the creation 

and maintenance of an illegal marketplace operating in parallel to the legitimate marketplace for 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 14 of 23
15 

Plaintiff’s genuine goods. Defendants are causing individual, concurrent and indivisible harm to 

Plaintiff and the consuming public by (i) depriving Plaintiff and other third parties of their right to 

fairly compete for space within search engine results and reducing the visibility of Plaintiff’s 

genuine goods on the World Wide Web, (ii) causing an overall degradation of the goodwill 

associated with the CreeLED Marks, and/or (iii) increasing Plaintiff’s overall cost to market the 

CreeLED Marks and educate consumers about their brand via the Internet. 

34. Upon information and belief, Defendants are concurrently targeting their 

counterfeiting and infringing activities toward consumers and causing harm within this District 

and elsewhere throughout the United States. As a result, Defendants are defrauding Plaintiff and 

the consuming public for Defendants’ own benefit. 

35. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant hereto, Defendants in this action 

had full knowledge of Plaintiff’s ownership of the CreeLED Marks, including their exclusive right 

to use and license such intellectual property and the goodwill associated therewith. 

36. Defendants’ use of the CreeLED Marks, including the promotion and 

advertisement, distribution, sale and offering for sale of their Counterfeit Goods, is without 

Plaintiff’s consent or authorization. 

37. Defendants are engaging in the above-described illegal counterfeiting and 

infringing activities knowingly and intentionally or with reckless disregard or willful blindness to 

Plaintiff’s rights for the purpose of trading on Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation. If Defendants’ 

intentional counterfeiting and infringing activities are not preliminarily and permanently enjoined 

by this Court, Plaintiff and the consuming public will continue to be harmed. 

38. Defendants’ above identified infringing activities are likely to cause confusion, 

deception, and mistake in the minds of consumers before, during and after the time of purchase. 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 15 of 23
16 

Moreover, Defendants’ wrongful conduct is likely to create a false impression and deceive 

customers, the public, and the trade into believing there is a connection or association between 

Plaintiff’s genuine goods and Defendants’ Counterfeit Goods, which there is not. 

39. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ payment and financial accounts are 

being used by Defendants to accept, receive, and deposit profits from Defendants’ trademark 

counterfeiting and infringing and unfairly competitive activities connected to their Seller IDs and 

any other alias seller identification names being used and/or controlled by them. 

40. Further, upon information and belief, Defendants are likely to transfer or conceal 

their assets to avoid payment of any monetary judgment awarded to Plaintiff. 

41. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. 

42. Plaintiff is suffering irreparable injury and have suffered substantial damages as a 

result of Defendants’ unauthorized and wrongful use of the CreeLED Marks . 

43. The harm and damages sustained by Plaintiff have been directly and proximately 

caused by Defendants’ wrongful use, advertisement, promotion, offers to sell, and sale of their 

Counterfeit Goods. 

COUNT I -- TRADEMARK COUNTERFEITING AND INFRINGEMENT 

PURSUANT TO § 32 OF THE LANHAM ACT (15 U.S.C. § 1114)

44. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-alleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 

through 43 as though fully set forth herein. 

45. This is an action for trademark counterfeiting and infringement against Defendants 

based on their use of counterfeit and confusingly similar imitations of the CreeLED Marks in 

commerce in connection with the promotion, advertisement, distribution, offering for sale, and 

sale of the Counterfeit Goods. 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 16 of 23
17 

46. Defendants are promoting and otherwise advertising, selling, offering for sale, and 

distributing goods, using counterfeits and/or infringements of the CreeLED Marks. Defendants 

are continuously infringing and inducing others to infringe the CreeLED Marks by using one or 

more of them to advertise, promote, offer to sell, and/or sell at least counterfeit and infringing 

goods. 

47. Defendants’ concurrent counterfeiting and infringing activities are likely to cause 

and actually are causing confusion, mistake, and deception among members of the trade and the 

general consuming public as to the origin and quality of Defendants’ Counterfeit Goods. 

48. Defendants’ unlawful actions have individually and jointly caused and are 

continuing to cause unquantifiable damage to Plaintiff and are unjustly enriching Defendants with 

profits at Plaintiff’s expense. 

49. Defendants’ above-described illegal actions constitute counterfeiting and 

infringement of the CreeLED Marks in violation of Plaintiff’s rights under § 32 of the Lanham 

Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114. 

50. Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable injury and damages due 

to Defendants’ above described activities if Defendants are not preliminarily and permanently 

enjoined. Additionally, Defendants will continue to wrongfully profit from their illegal activities. 

COUNT II -- FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN 

PURSUANT TO § 43(A) OF THE LANHAM ACT (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))

51. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-alleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 

through 43 as though fully set forth herein. 

52. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ Counterfeit Goods bearing, offered for 

sale, and sold under copies of the CreeLED Marks have been widely advertised and offered for 

sale throughout the United States via the Internet. 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 17 of 23
18 

53. Defendants’ Counterfeit Goods bearing, offered for sale, and sold under copies of 

the CreeLED Marks are virtually identical in appearance to Plaintiff’s genuine goods. However, 

Defendants’ Counterfeit Goods are different in quality. Accordingly, Defendants’ activities are 

likely to cause confusion in the trade and among the general public as to at least the origin or 

sponsorship of their Counterfeit Goods. 

54. Defendants, upon information and belief, have used in connection with their 

advertisement, offer for sale, and sale of their Counterfeit Goods, false designations of origin and 

false descriptions and representations, including words or other symbols and trade dress, which 

tend to falsely describe or represent such goods and have caused such goods to enter into commerce 

with full knowledge of the falsity of such designations of origin and such descriptions and 

representations, all to Plaintiff’s detriment. 

55. Defendants have authorized infringing uses of the CreeLED Marks in Defendants’ 

advertisement and promotion of their counterfeit and infringing branded goods. Defendants have 

misrepresented to members of the consuming public that the Counterfeit Goods being advertised 

and sold by them are genuine, non-infringing goods. 

56. Additionally, Defendants are using counterfeits and infringements of the CreeLED 

Marks in order to unfairly compete with Plaintiff and others for space within search engine organic 

results, thereby jointly depriving Plaintiff of a valuable marketing and educational tool which 

would otherwise be available to Plaintiff and reducing the visibility of Plaintiff’s genuine goods 

on the World Wide Web. 

57. Defendants’ above-described actions are in violation of Section 43(a) of the 

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a). 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 18 of 23
19 

58. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and has sustained indivisible injury and 

damage caused by Defendants’ concurrent conduct. Absent an entry of an injunction by this Court, 

Defendants will continue to wrongfully reap profits and Plaintiff will continue to suffer irreparable 

injury to its goodwill and business reputation, as well as monetary damages. 

COUNT III -- COMMON LAW UNFAIR COMPETITION

59. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-alleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 

through 43 as though fully set forth herein. 

60. This is an action against Defendants based on their promotion, advertisement, 

distribution, sale, and/or offering for sale of goods using marks which are virtually identical, both 

visually and phonetically, to the CreeLED Marks in violation of Florida’s common law of unfair 

competition. 

61. Specifically, Defendants are promoting and otherwise advertising, selling, offering 

for sale and distributing goods bearing counterfeits and infringements of the CreeLED Marks. 

Defendants are also using counterfeits and infringements of the CreeLED Marks to unfairly 

compete with Plaintiff for (i) space in search engine results across an array of search terms and/or 

(ii) visibility on the World Wide Web. 

62. Defendants’ infringing activities are likely to cause and actually are causing 

confusion, mistake and deception among members of the trade and the general consuming public 

as to the origin and quality of Defendants’ products by their use of the CreeLED Marks. 

63. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and is suffering irreparable injury and 

damages as a result of Defendants’ actions. 

COUNT IV - COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 19 of 23
20 

64. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-alleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 

through 43 as though fully set forth herein. 

65. This is an action for common law trademark infringement against Defendants based 

on their promotion, advertisement, offering for sale, and sale of their Counterfeit Goods bearing 

the CreeLED Marks. Plaintiff is the owner of all common law rights in and to the CreeLED Marks. 

66. Specifically, Defendants, upon information and belief, are promoting and otherwise 

advertising, distributing, offering for sale, and selling goods bearing infringements of the CreeLED 

Marks. 

67. Defendants’ infringing activities are likely to cause and actually are causing 

confusion, mistake, and deception among members of the trade and general consuming public as 

to the origin and quality of Defendants’ Counterfeit Goods bearing the CreeLED Marks. 

68. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and is suffering damages and irreparable 

injury as a result of Defendants’ actions.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment on all Counts of this Complaint and an award 

of equitable relief and monetary relief against Defendants as follows: 

A. Entry of temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctions pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1116, 17 U.S.C. § 502(a), and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 enjoining Defendants, their 

agents, representatives, servants, employees, and all those acting in concert or participation 

therewith, from manufacturing or causing to be manufactured, importing, advertising or 

promoting, distributing, selling or offering to sell their Counterfeit Goods; from infringing, 

counterfeiting, or diluting the CreeLED Marks; from using the CreeLED Marks, or any mark or 

design similar thereto, in connection with the sale of any unauthorized goods; from using any logo, 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 20 of 23
21 

trade name or trademark or design that may be calculated to falsely advertise the services or 

products of Defendants as being sponsored by, authorized by, endorsed by, or in any way 

associated with Plaintiff; from falsely representing themselves as being connected with Plaintiff, 

through sponsorship or association, or engaging in any act that is likely to falsely cause members 

of the trade and/or of the purchasing public to believe any goods or services of Defendants are in 

any way endorsed by, approved by, and/or associated with Plaintiff; from using any counterfeit, 

copy, or colorable imitation of the CreeLED Marks in connection with the publicity, promotion, 

sale, or advertising of any goods sold by Defendants; from affixing, applying, annexing or using 

in connection with the sale of any goods, a false description or representation, including words or 

other symbols tending to falsely describe or represent Defendants’ goods as being those of 

Plaintiff’s, or in any way endorsed by Plaintiff and from offering such goods in commerce; from 

engaging in search engine optimization strategies using colorable imitations of Plaintiff’s 

CreeLED Marks; and from otherwise unfairly competing with Plaintiff. 

B. Entry of an order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), The All Writs Act, and the 

Court’s inherent authority, that, upon Plaintiff’s request, the applicable governing Internet 

marketplace website operators and/or administrators for the Seller IDs who are provided with 

notice of an injunction issued by the Court disable and/or cease facilitating access to the Seller 

IDs, and any other alias seller identification names being used and/or controlled by Defendants to 

engage in the business of marketing, offering to sell, and/or selling goods bearing counterfeits and 

infringements of the CreeLED Marks. 

C. Entry of an order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), The All Writs Act, and the 

Court’s inherent authority, that, upon Plaintiff’s request, any Internet marketplace website 

operators and/or administrators for the Seller IDs who are provided with notice of an injunction 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 21 of 23
22 

issued by the Court, identify any e-mail address known to be associated with Defendants’ 

respective Seller ID. 

D. Entry of an order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), The All Writs Act, and the 

Court’s inherent authority that, upon Plaintiff’s request, any Internet marketplace website 

operators and/or administrators who are provided with notice of an injunction issued by the Court 

permanently remove any and all listings and associated images of goods bearing counterfeits 

and/or infringements of the CreeLED Marks via the e-commerce stores operating under the Seller 

IDs, and upon Plaintiff’s request, any other listings and images of goods bearing counterfeits 

and/or infringements of the CreeLED Marks associated with and/or linked to the same sellers or 

linked to any other alias seller identification names being used and/or controlled by Defendants to 

promote, offer for sale and/or sell goods bearing counterfeits and/or infringements of the CreeLED 

Marks. 

E. Entry of an order requiring Defendants to account to and pay Plaintiff for all profits 

and damages resulting from Defendants’ trademark counterfeiting and infringing and unfairly 

competitive activities and that the award to Plaintiff be trebled, as provided for under 15 U.S.C. 

§1117, or, at Plaintiff’s election with respect to Count I, that Plaintiff be awarded statutory 

damages from each Defendant in the amount of two million US dollars ($2,000,000.00) per each 

counterfeit trademark used and product type sold, as provided by 15 U.S.C. §1117(c)(2) of the 

Lanham Act. 

F. Entry of an order that, upon Plaintiff’s request, Defendants and any financial 

institutions, payment processors, banks, escrow services, money transmitters, or marketplace 

platforms, and their related companies and affiliates, identify and restrain all funds, up to and 

including the total amount of judgment, in all financial accounts and/or sub-accounts used in 

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 22 of 23
23 

connection with the Seller IDs or other alias seller identification or e-commerce store names, 

domain names and/or websites used by Defendants presently or in the future, as well as any other 

related accounts of the same customer(s) and any other accounts which transfer funds into the same 

financial institution account(s), to be surrendered to Plaintiff in partial satisfaction of the monetary 

judgment entered herein. 

G. Entry of an award pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (a) and (b) of Plaintiff’s costs and 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and investigative fees associated with bringing this action. 

H. Entry of an order requiring Defendants to pay prejudgment interest according to 

law. 

I. Entry of an order for such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper 

and just. 

Date: October 31, 2022 Respectfully submitted by, 

Richard Guerra 

 Richard Guerra (Fla. Bar No. 689521) 

 Attorney Email address: rguerra@brickellip.com 

THE BRICKELL IP GROUP, PLLC 

1101 Brickell Avenue, South Tower, Suite 800 

Miami FL, 33131 

Telephone: (305) 728-8831 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 1:22-cv-23321-KMW Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2022 Page 23 of 23