Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/85198178/Complaint-Oscar-Statue-Rental
Timestamp: 2015-03-02 15:19:47
Document Index: 441661393

Matched Legal Cases: ['arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty78381800', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838', 'arty7838']

P. 1Complaint Oscar Statue RentalComplaint Oscar Statue RentalRatings: (0)|Views: 3,684|Likes: 0Published by marty7838trademark copyright complaint oscar statuetrademark copyright complaint oscar statueMore info:Categories:Types, Business/Law, Court FilingsPublished by: marty7838 on Mar 13, 2012Copyright:Attribution Non-commercialAvailability:Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate content|Add to collectionSee moreSee lesshttps://www.scribd.com/doc/85198178/Complaint-Oscar-Statue-Rental05/09/2013pdftextoriginal KH190025.DOC 9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTNORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIAATLANTA DIVISIONACADEMY OF MOTIONPICTURE ARTS AND SCIENCES,a California nonprofit corporation,Plaintiff,v.THEEVENTLINE.COM, INC, anIllinois corporation, and ROBERT L.HOLLINGSWORTH, an individual,Defendants)))))))))))))CIVIL ACTION FILENO. ___________
Plaintiff, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (the
), hereby files this Complaint against Defendants TheEventLine.com,Inc
. (“TEL”),
an Illinois corporation, and Robert Hollingsworth, an individual
(collectively “Defendants”),
and in support thereof respectfully shows the Court asfollows:
The Academy is a non-profit corporation that annually hosts its world-famous
presents “
statues each year to
Case 1:12-cv-00825-TCB Document 1 Filed 03/09/12 Page 1 of 34
honor achievements in motion picture-making. Defendants are marketing andrenting u
nlawful replicas of the Academy‟
s copyrighted
statue andinfringing the Academy
‟s “
marks. After the Academy repeatedly askedDefendants to cease and desist, Defendants continue to rent, sell, and/or use theunlawful replicas.2.
actions constitute deliberate, willful, and unlawful infringementof the Academy
s intellectual property rights. The Academy therefore seeks (i)injunctive relief to restrain Defendants from continuing to distribute, advertise,manufacture, sell, and/or rent statues that are identical to, or substantially orstrikingly similar to the Acad
emy‟s
tatue; (ii) the impoundment anddestruction of all such statues in
possession, custody, or control; (iii)
the Academy‟s
actual damages and lost profits or statutory damages as allowed bythe copyright laws and treble damages as allowed by the trademark laws; (iv) itscosts; (v) its attorneys
fees; and (vi) such other and further relief this Court mayaward.
Case 1:12-cv-00825-TCB Document 1 Filed 03/09/12 Page 2 of 34
The Academy is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a non-profitcorporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, withits principal place of business in Los Angeles County, California.4.
On information and belief, Defendant TEL is an Illinois corporation with itsprincipal place of business in Edwardsville, Illinois. According to its website, TEL
is a “Tent, Party, Wedding & Event Rental” company
with locations in Georgia,Missouri, and Illinois. A true and correct copy of the homepage of TEL‟s
website,reproduced on March 2, 2012, is attached as Exhibit 1 and is incorporated byreference as if set forth fully herein.5.
TEL‟s “Atlanta Region” warehouse, at which unlawful replica statues are
kept and rented from, is located at 420 W. Industrial Court, Villa Rica, Georgia30180.6.
Defendant Robert L. Hollingsworth
(“Hollingsworth”)
is TEL‟s President
and Corporate Administrator. Upon information and belief, Hollingsworth is a
Case 1:12-cv-00825-TCB Document 1 Filed 03/09/12 Page 3 of 34
Activity (5)FiltersAdd to collectionReview Add NoteLikeShowingAllMost RecentReviewsAll NotesLikesYou've already reviewed this. Edit your review.Rating 0/5Post notePost reviewPost replyPost note and like1 thousand reads1 hundred readsQueenie Benmour liked thisLoad more
More From This UserAaa v Howard Johnsonmarty7838Romanian Chamber of Commercemarty7838Lv v Costco Chain of Custodymarty7838Dittrich v Despairmarty7838Lv v Hyundai Refusal of Cert for Appealmarty7838Complaint Nike v John Doe Port of Newark Tariffmarty7838Complaint Under Armour Body Armormarty7838Peoples Express Kelseymarty7838kickstarter DJmarty7838Lv Hyundai Basketballmarty7838Ucalegon v Monikermarty7838Cmg v Estate of Monroemarty7838Nike v Kau Summary Judgementmarty7838BMI v Haibomarty7838Seafood Temptationsmarty7838Sdny Decision Own Your Powermarty7838Sdny Own Your Powermarty7838Sdny Own Your Powermarty7838Skydive Skyride Damagesmarty78381800 Tequila Trade Dressmarty7838Bussey Law Firmmarty7838Rocket v Pocketmarty7838Apple Proview Agreement.with Schedule PDFmarty7838Ny Coa Long Arm Jurisdiction American Buddhamarty7838