1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

GOLIGHT, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

LARSON ELECTRONICS, LLC,

Defendant.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Civil Action No. _______________________

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Golight, Inc. (“Plaintiff”), having its principal place of business at 37146 

Old Hwy. 17, Culbertson, NE 69024, by and through its undersigned counsel and by way 

of Complaint against the defendant, hereby alleges and says:

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant Larson Electronics, LLC

(“Larson” or “Defendant”) to combat Larson’s willful infringement of Plaintiff’s exclusive 

rights under the trademark laws of the United States (15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq.) and to 

remedy Larson’s acts of infringement (pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1125(a)(1)(a)), 

false advertising (pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(b)), unfair competition (15 U.S.C. §§ 

1125(a)(1)(a) and trademark infringement under the common law of the state of Texas.

JURISDICTION, VENUE AND PARTIES

2. This Court has original jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§§ 1331 and 1338(a) because the claims arise, in large part, under the Lanham Act. This 

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 1 of 14 PageID 1
2

Court also has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 based upon the diversity 

of citizenship of the parties and the amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. This Court 

has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s common law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§§ 1367.

3. Plaintiff is a Nebraska corporation with its principal place of business at 

37146 Old Hwy. 17, Culbertson, Hitchcock County, Nebraska 69024.

4. Defendant Larson is, upon information and belief, a Texas Corporation duly 

registered to do business in the State of Texas and doing business in the State of Texas with 

its principal place of business located at 9419 E. US Hwy 175, Kemp, Kaufman County, 

Texas 75143. Citation may be served on the Defendant’s registered agent, Controlling 

Factor at 11035 Jeanell Drive, Kemp, Texas 75143 or any other address and/or by any other 

lawful means.

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant, as Defendant has a 

principal place of business in this District. Defendant has also committed acts complained 

of herein in this District and conducts substantial business in this District through sales to 

consumers and potential consumers, including through Defendant’s storefront at 

www.larsonelectronics.com. See Exhibit 2. Defendant regularly conducts business in this 

District and has availed itself of the laws of the state of Texas.

6. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7. Since at least as early as 1994, Plaintiff has been an industry leader in the 

field of lighting equipment, particularly permanently mounted and portable searchlights 

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 2 of 14 PageID 2
3

and related area illumination systems. Plaintiff’s lighting products are utilized by 

customers throughout the United States, including on police and military vehicles, 

recreational watercraft, commercial boats, off-road vehicles, snow plows and several other 

types of vehicles. Plaintiff maintains a website at www.golight.com. See Exhibit 1. 

8. Plaintiff maintains no fewer than eleven registered trademarks 

encompassing Plaintiff’s GOLIGHT, STRYKER, RADIO RAY, GOBEE, LED XTREME 

and other popular brands manufactured and sold by Plaintiff. Plaintiff also has common 

law rights from the extensive use of its GOLIGHT trademark over the course of 28 years.

9. Defendant is a distributor of a broad range of equipment, more specifically, 

lighting, hunting and boating equipment and vehicle equipment. See Exhibit 2. 

10. In or around February 2011, Plaintiff entered into a license and distribution 

agreement with Defendant for the purpose of promoting, offering for sale and selling 

Plaintiff’s products in the state of Texas. The agreement included quality and brand control 

provisions, as well as an explicit license to use the trademarks and service marks owned by 

Plaintiff. See Exhibit 3.

11. During the course of the parties’ agreement, and particularly during the last 

two years, Defendant violated Plaintiff’s quality and brand controls, including by 

rebranding Golight’s products and in many instances obscuring Golight’s trademarks. In 

addition, Defendant applied Golight’s unique part numbers to non-Golight products it 

distributed. Defendant also made claims to consumers and potential consumers that 

Defendant was the original manufacturer of the Golight products.

12. Plaintiff notified Defendant of its violations on several occasions, including 

by written correspondence dated August 5, 2020. See Exhibit 4. Plaintiff also discovered, 

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 3 of 14 PageID 3
4

in or about April 2021, that Larson had listed original Golight products for sale on 

www.amazon.com (“Amazon”) and stated in those listings that Defendant, not Golight, 

was the manufacturer of the product.

13. As Defendant’s violations continued throughout 2021, Plaintiff sent a notice 

of termination of the license and distributor agreement to Defendant in August, 2021. The 

license provided to Defendant expired on September 10, 2021. Golight has provided no 

continuing authority or license to Defendant since the parties’ agreement terminated.

14. Following termination of the license, Defendant continued to list new and 

original Golight products on Amazon and its own website, www.larsonelectronics.com, in 

violation of Golight’s intellectual property rights. Certain listings were for other products 

distributed by Defendant, although the listings identified Golight as the source of the 

products. See Exhibit 5. Plaintiff sent a demand letter to Larson on September 17, 2021 

notifying Defendant of the counterfeit products being offered for sale on Amazon. See

Exhibit 6. Defendant’s violations have continued without abatement since Plaintiff 

notified Defendant of the same.

15. Following the September 17, 2021 demand letter, Plaintiff learned that 

Defendant was taking affirmative steps to remove authorized resellers of Golight products 

from Amazon, in part by claiming that Defendant was the brand owner and that the reseller 

did not have authority from Defendant to list Golight products for sale. Golight and its 

authorized resellers were forced to take action to remedy this and other false claims made 

by Defendant.

16. To this date, Defendant continues to list products that are not Golight 

products, although Defendant identifies them on its website as “Golight” products, 

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 4 of 14 PageID 4
5

including by identifying specific brand names such as “Radio Ray” and “Stryker” in the 

product offering. See Exhibit 10. Plaintiff has notified Defendant of these continuing 

violations on numerous occasions over the past 6 months, and longer.

COUNT I

(Trademark Infringement)

15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1125(a)(1)(a)

17. Plaintiff repeats and reasserts each of the allegations contained in each of 

the foregoing paragraphs and incorporated them here as though fully set forth at length.

18. Plaintiff has registered “GOLIGHT” with United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, which appears on the principal register as U.S. Registration Numbers 

2,484,086 & 4,405,955 (the “GOLIGHT Mark”). See Exhibit 7 and 8. Plaintiff has also 

been awarded United States Trademark Registration No. 3,033,944 (the “STRYKER 

Mark”). See Exhibit 9.

19. The GOLIGHT Mark and STRYKER Mark, which are owned exclusively 

by Plaintiff, are valid and subsisting trademarks in full force and effect.

20. Defendant willfully and knowingly used and continues to infringe upon the 

GOLIGHT Mark and the STRYKER Mark in interstate commerce for purposes of selling 

lighting products bearing the GOLIGHT Mark and/or the STRYKER Mark, throughout the 

United States, without Plaintiff’s consent.

21. Defendant is not authorized to use the GOLIGHT Mark or the STRYKER 

Mark in any manner.

22. Defendant’s unauthorized sale of products bearing the GOLIGHT Mark and 

STRYKER Mark is likely to cause confusion, cause mistake, or deceive consumers. 

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 5 of 14 PageID 5
6

Defendant’s unauthorized sale of products bearing the GOLIGHT Mark and STRYKER 

Mark is also likely to cause confusion, cause mistake, or deceive consumers because it 

suggests that Defendant is somehow affiliated with or sponsored by Plaintiff. 

23. Defendant’s unauthorized use of the GOLIGHT Mark and the STRYKER 

Mark has infringed upon and materially damaged the value of the GOLIGHT and 

STRYKER Marks, and has caused significant damage to Plaintiff and its business 

relationships.

24. As a proximate result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff has suffered, and 

continues to suffer, damages, including, but not limited to, loss of business, goodwill, 

reputation, and profits in an amount to be proven at trial. 

25. Plaintiff is entitled to recover its damages caused by Defendant’s 

infringement of the GOLIGHT Mark and the STRYKER Mark, and disgorge Defendant’s 

profits from its willfully infringing sales and unjust enrichment.

26. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief under 15 U.S.C. § 1116 because it 

has no adequate remedy of law for Defendant’s infringement and, unless Defendant is 

permanently enjoined, Plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm.

27. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) because 

Defendant has willfully, intentionally, maliciously, and in bad faith infringed on the 

GOLIGHT Mark and the STRYKER Mark.

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 6 of 14 PageID 6
7

COUNT II

(False Advertising)

15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(b)

28. Plaintiff repeats and reasserts each of the allegations contained in each of 

the foregoing paragraphs and incorporated them here as though fully set forth at length.

29. Defendant’s advertisement and promotion of its products unlawfully using 

the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks has been disseminated to the relevant purchasing 

public. Defendant’s unauthorized use of the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks in 

advertising, and otherwise, infringes on the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks.

30. Defendant has used, and continues to use, the GOLIGHT and STRYKER 

Marks to falsely advertise that the products and they sell, including false advertising that 

the products they sell are associated or affiliated with Plaintiff and/or are made and sold 

under the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks. The products Defendant sells are not 

authorized for sale by Plaintiff.

31. Defendant uses of the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks in connection with 

the unauthorized advertising, promotion, and sale of products bearing the GOLIGHT and 

STRYKER Marks misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, and origin of 

Defendant’s products because it suggests that the products are those of Plaintiff or are sold 

under the license from Plaintiff.

32. Defendant’s unauthorized use of the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks in 

connection with the unauthorized advertising, promotion, and sale of products bearing the 

GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks is likely to cause confusion, cause mistake, or deceive 

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 7 of 14 PageID 7
8

consumers because it suggests that Defendant is sponsored, authorized, or otherwise 

connected with Plaintiff.

33. Defendant’s unauthorized and deceptive use of the GOLIGHT and 

STRYKER Marks is material and likely to influence customers to purchase the products 

they sell, as consumers are likely to believe that products Defendant advertise using the 

GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks are Plaintiff’s products.

34. As a proximate result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff has suffered, and will 

continue to suffer, damage to its business, goodwill, reputation, and profits in an amount 

to be proven at trial.

35. Plaintiff is entitled to recover its damages caused by Defendant’s 

infringement of the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks and disgorge Defendant’s profits 

from its willfully infringing sales and unjust enrichment.

36. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief under 15 U.S.C. § 1116 because it 

has no adequate remedy at law for Defendant’s infringement and unless Defendant is 

permanently enjoined, Plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm.

37. Plaintiff is entitled to enhanced damages and attorney’s fees under 15 

U.S.C. § 1117(a) because Defendant has willfully, intentionally, maliciously, and in bad 

faith infringed on the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks.

COUNT III

Unfair Competition

15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)

38. Plaintiff repeats and reasserts each of the allegations contained in each of 

the foregoing paragraphs and incorporated them here as though fully set forth at length.

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 8 of 14 PageID 8
9

39. Defendant has willfully and knowingly used, and continues to use, the 

GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks in interstate commerce for purpose of selling 

Defendant’s product without Plaintiff’s consent.

40. The products Defendant advertises and sells bearing the GOLIGHT and 

STRYKER Marks are not authorized for sale by Plaintiff.

41. The products Defendant advertises and sells bearing the GOLIGHT and 

STRYKER Marks do not abide by and interfere with Plaintiff’s quality controls and/or 

requirements, as those products are materially different from Plaintiff’s original and 

genuine products.

42. Defendant’s unauthorized advertisement and sale of products bearing the 

GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks is likely to cause confusion, cause mistake, or deceive 

consumers because it suggests that the products Defendant offers originate from Plaintiff

and/or are of the same quality as the products originating from Plaintiff. 

43. Defendant’s unauthorized advertisement and sale of products bearing the 

GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks is likely to cause confusion, cause mistake, or deceive 

consumers because it suggests that Defendant is sponsored by, authorized by, or otherwise 

connected with Plaintiff.

44. Defendant’s unauthorized use of the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks has 

infringed upon and materially damaged the value of the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks

and caused significant damage to Plaintiff’s business relationship.

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 9 of 14 PageID 9
10

45. As a proximate result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff has suffered, and will 

continue to suffer, damages to its business, goodwill, reputation, and profits in an amount 

to be proven at trial.

46. Plaintiff is entitled to recover its damages caused by Defendant’s unfair 

competition, including infringement of the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks, and 

disgorge Defendant’s profits from its willfully acts of unfair competition.

47. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief under 15 U.S.C. § 1116 because it 

has no adequate remedy at law for Defendant’s infringement and, unless Defendant is 

permanently enjoined, Plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm.

48. Plaintiff is entitled to enhanced damages and attorney’s fees under 15 

U.S.C. § 1117(a) because Defendant has willfully, intentionally, maliciously, and in bad 

faith infringed on the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks. 

COUNT IV

(Trademark Infringement)

Common Law

49. Plaintiff repeats and reasserts each of the allegations contained in each of 

the foregoing paragraphs and incorporated them here as though fully set forth at length.

50. Defendant’s acts, as described above, have caused and are likely to cause 

confusion or mistake or to deceive customers as to the affiliation, connection or association 

of Defendant with Plaintiff, or as to the origin, sponsorship or approval of Defendant’s 

goods, services or commercial activities in violation of the common law of Texas.

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 10 of 14 PageID 10
11

51. Defendant’s acts of infringement have caused both irreparable harm and 

monetary damages to Plaintiff in an amount that cannot be ascertained at this time. Still, 

monetary damages alone are not adequate to fully address Defendant’s infringement.

52. Defendant’s acts of infringement and unfair competition in Texas have been 

willful and undertaken with the specific intent to misappropriate the goodwill and 

reputation associated with Plaintiff and its products.

53. As a proximate result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff has suffered, and 

continues to suffer, damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against 

Defendant as follows:

1. Declaring that both the GOLIGHT Mark and the STRYKER Mark 

is protectable and infringed by Defendant;

2. Declaring that Defendant has infringed U.S. Trademark Registration 

No. 2,484,086;

3. Declaring that Defendant has infringed U.S. Trademark Registration 

No. 4,405,955;

4. Declaring that Defendant has infringed U.S. Trademark Registration 

No. 3,033,944;

5. Declaring that Defendant's infringement was knowing, intentional, 

and willful;

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 11 of 14 PageID 11
12

6. Issuing temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctions 

enjoining Defendant, its officers, agents, subsidiaries, and employees, and those in 

privity with or that act in concert with any of the foregoing, from:

A. using the “GOLIGHT” name and/or the “STRYKER” name 

(including in connection with the promotion, marketing, 

advertising, and sale of products), any colorable imitation thereof, 

or any otherwise confusingly similar mark;

B. engaging in any other act or thing likely to confuse, mislead or 

deceive others into believing that Defendant, or its products, are 

connected with, sponsored by or approved by Plaintiff; and

C. engaging in any other activity constituting unfair competition with 

Plaintiff, or constituting an infringement of Plaintiff's rights in and 

to the GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks.

7. Ordering that all labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, 

receptacles, and advertisements in the possession of Defendant bearing or using the 

GOLIGHT or STRYKER Marks, or any colorable imitation thereof, and all plates, 

molds, matrices, and other means of making the same, be delivered to Plaintiff for 

destruction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1118;

8. Ordering Defendant, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a), to file with 

the Court and serve on Plaintiff's counsel within 30 days after service of the 

injunction, a written report, sworn under oath, setting forth in detail the manner and 

form in which Defendant has complied with the injunction;

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 12 of 14 PageID 12
13

9. For an accounting of all profits derived from Defendant's 

infringement of Plaintiff's GOLIGHT and STRYKER Marks, at Defendant's 

expense; 

10. For disgorgement of all revenue and profits from Defendant's 

unlawful conduct, including an award of damages available under 15 U.S.C. §§ 

1117 and 1125, and further including for Defendant’s willful violation of § 43(a);

11. For an award of Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in this 

action;

12. For pre- and post-judgment interest;

13. For an award of costs as the prevailing party; and

14. For any and all other relief that the Court deems just.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Golight, Inc. demands a Jury Trial on all issues so triable.

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 13 of 14 PageID 13
14

Respectfully submitted,

FISHER BROYLES, LLP

By: /s/ Ryan T. Beard 

Ryan T. Beard

Texas Bar No. 24012264

100 Congress Avenue, Suite 2000

Austin, Texas 78701

Telephone: (512) 577-2673

Email: ryan.beard@fisherbroyles.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Golight, Inc.

Case 3:22-cv-01138-X Document 1 Filed 05/24/22 Page 14 of 14 PageID 14