Source: https://quackwatch.org/credential/legal/auap/complaint/
Timestamp: 2020-05-26 10:30:36
Document Index: 466629777

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 13', '§ 1391', '§ 1117', '§1125', '§ 1125', '§ 1117']

American Universities Admission Program Sued for Trademark Infringement | Quackwatch
The American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) has filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Jean-Noel Prade and his American Universities Admission Program (AUAP). which purports to evaluate the academic credentials of foreign students to help them gain admission to American universities. The suit complains that AUAP’s actions “perpetuate the fraudulent actions of . . . diploma mills and foreign students by giving credence to their credentials with false or suspect evaluations and accreditations.” The suit demands that AUAP stop all actions which falsely suggest that it is somehow associated or connected with AACRAO.
For its complaint and application for a temporary restraining order against defendants American Universities Admission Program, Inc. (“AUAP”) and Jean-Noel Prade (“Prade”) (collectively “defendants”), Plaintiff American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (“AACRAO”), by and through its attorneys, states as follows:
6. AUAP is subject to the specific personal jurisdiction of this Court pursuant District of Columbia Code Annotated § 13-423(1) and (3) because it transacts business within the District of Columbia and it caused tortious injury in the District of Columbia by acts in the District of Columbia. AUAP entered into five consecutive one-year memberships (from 2000 to 2005) with AACRAO, an entity organized in the District of Columbia. As fully explained below, AUAP has caused tortious injury to AACRAO by the unauthorized use of AACRAO’s marks and by falsely representing that AUAP is affiliated with AACRAO. AUAP’s unauthorized use of AACRAO’s marks and its false representations occur, among other places, on its interactive website located at the URL www.auap.com. Through its interactive website, AUAP offers its products and services to residents in the District of Columbia. For example, AUAP offers on its website a Coaching and Consulting Program and accepts submission of credit card information for its $399.00 per program month fee. See Exhibit 1. AUAP also advertises on its website that it evaluates academic credentials for immigration purposes and thus provides services to be used with a federal agency based in the District of Columbia.
8. Upon information and belief, Prade is the alter ego of AUAP. Upon information and belief, AUAP is a closely held corporation with Prade as its sole officer and director. He and a related family member, Elizabeth Prade, are the sole principals of AUAP. Upon information and belief, Prade has used his personal assets for payment of AUAP’s debt and thus has co-mingled his funds with AUAP.
9. Venue in this district is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (b) and (c). AUAP is a corporation that is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court as explained in paragraph 6. Defendants’ tortious activity harms the reputation and intellectual property of AACRAO, a non-profit organization of the District of Columbia, and thus the violation of AACRAO’s property rights and the harm to AACRAO occurs in the District of Columbia. Moreover, many of the relevant records and witnesses involved in this action exist in the District of Columbia.
A. AACRAO’s Trademarks
12. AACRAO owns all rights and interests in the above registered marks, marks pending registrations, and common law marks (collectively “AACRAO trademarks”).
14. AACRAO offers yearly, non-voting memberships with its organization to individuals or organizations upon payment of a membership fee. Members are allowed access to information and services from AACRAO not available to the public. Members, however, are not allowed to use AACRAO’s name, trademarks, or logo without written permission from AACRAO nor hold themselves out as being endorsed or affiliated with AACRAO without written permission.
16. Unfortunately, some entities provide false or highly deficient evaluations and thus undermine the evaluation process. Furthermore, institutions known as “diploma mills” fraudulently produce fake or unsupported academic credentials for foreign students. In turn, the unlawful entities further perpetuate the fraudulent actions of the diploma mills and the foreign students by giving credence to their credentials with false or suspect evaluations and accreditations.
C. AUAP’s Activities
18. Upon information and belief, admission officers at universities and other higher education institutions have indicated to AACRAO that AUAP’s evaluations are of less than acceptable quality.
20. AUAP had a non-voting, corporate membership with AACRAO from July 2000 to June 2005. During the period when AUAP was a member, however, AUAP had no permission to use AACRAO’s name, trademarks, or logo.
21 On or about June, 2001, AACRAO became aware of AUAP’s use of AACRAO’s federally registered mark, AACRAO 1910, and Design (Registration Number 2,081,476), on AUAP’s letterhead. AACRAO alerted AUAP of its unauthorized use in an effort to educate one of its non-voting, corporate members of the applicable rules regarding the use of AACRAO’s trademarks that apply to members and to bring AACRAO within compliance of its membership agreement with AACRAO. To that end, on or about July 18, 2001, AACRAO sent a letter to AUAP, addressed to Prade, stating that AUAP has no authorization to use AACRAO’s mark and must cease its use immediately. See Exhibit 3.
23. On or about October, 2003 AACRAO became aware that AUAP was using AACRAO’s marks ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGIATE REGISTRARS AND ADMISSIONS OFFICERS and AACRAO on its letterhead, advertising, and other documents. On or about October 14, 2003, AACRAO sent a letter to AUAP, addressed to Prade, stating that AUAP had no authorization to use AACRAO’s marks and that the use of the marks falsely suggested that AUAP’s goods and services were approved or authorized by AACRAO. See Exhibit 5.
24. On or about June 30, 2005, AUAP ceased to be a corporate member of AACRAO for its failure to pay its membership fee. On or about September 2005, AACRAO became aware of AUAP’s continued use of the marks ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGIATE REGISTRARS AND ADMISSIONS OFFICERS and AACRAO and AUAP’s false representation that it is a member of AACRAO on its letters and other promotional materials distributed or accessible in commerce throughout the United States. See Exhibit 6. AACRAO also was aware that AUAP prominently uses the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGIATE REGISTRARS AND ADMISSIONS OFFICERS and AACRAO marks on its website at the URL www.auap.com and represents that AUAP is a member of AACRAO.
25. On or about November 3, 2005, AACRAO sent a letter to AUAP, addressed to Prade, reiterating that AUAP had no authorization to use AACRAO’s marks and instructed AUAP to cease and desist from making use of the AACRAO marks and to remove any statements or suggestions that AUAP is a member of or affiliated with AACRAO. See Exhibit 7.
27. On or about December 21, 2005, contrary to their previous acquiesces to AACRAO’s trademark rights, defendants responded to AACRAO’s letters and asserted, for the first time, that AUAP has a right to use AACRAO’s trademarks. See Exhibit 9.
28. On or about January 3, 2006, AACRAO received an evaluation written by AUAP and on AUAP letterhead that shows the words “Reciprocal Member AACRAO” prominently displayed near the top of the evaluation. See Exhibit 10.
32. Upon information and belief, defendants have willfully infringed AACRAO’s registered trademark with the intention of causing confusion, mistake or deception. The goodwill of AACRAO’s business under its AACRAO trademark is of great value, and AACRAO will suffer irreparable harm should infringement be allowed to continue to the detriment of its trademark, reputation, and goodwill.
33. AACRAO has no control over the quality of the products and services offered by defendants. Thus, the value of AACRAO’s mark is subject to damage by defendants and affiliated individuals it cannot control. AACRAO’s reputation will suffer because admission officers at universities and other institutions of higher education will associate defendants’ goods and services as being approved or reviewed by AACRAO when no such endorsement or review has occurred. This is particularly harmful in view of university admission officers’ indication to AACRAO that AUAP’s evaluations are of less than acceptable quality and AACRAO has determined that the evaluations are factually incomplete, contain discrepancies, and are generally carelessly produced.
35. Defendants’ acts of infringement, as alleged herein, have been undertaken with knowledge of AACRAO’s exclusive rights to the AACRAO’s trademark, entitling AACRAO to an award of treble its actual damages, plus attorneys’ fees in bringing and maintaining this action, pursuant to section 35(b) of the Lanham Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1117(b) (2005).
38. Defendants AUAP and Prade’s use of AACRAO’s marks in interstate commerce, including use on the World Wide Web, is likely to deceive customers and prospective customers into believing that defendants’ products and services are those of AACRAO, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1125(a).
39. Defendants’ actions are likely to deceive the public into believing that defendants have an affiliation, connection, or association with AACRAO, in violation of 15 U.S.C.§ 1125(a). In turn, AACRAO’s reputation will be harmed by universities believing that AACRAO has in some way approved or reviewed AUAP’s evaluations when AACRAO has not.
41. Defendants’ continued false representation and designation is with full knowledge of AACRAO’s exclusive rights to the AACRAO’s marks. Such acts are made in conscious disregard of AACRAO’s rights entitling AACRAO to treble its actual damages, plus attorneys’ fees in bringing and maintaining this action, pursuant to section 35(b) of the Lanham Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1117(b).
43. Defendants’ conduct constitutes unfair competition under the common law of the District of Columbia.
44. As a result of defendants’ wrongful conduct, AACRAO has been damaged and will continue to be damaged in an amount to be determined at trial. AACRAO has suffered and continues to suffer immediate and irreparable injury for which it has no adequate remedy at law unless this Court enjoins the wrongful activities of defendants.
(i) That the Court enter a temporary restraining order pending a preliminary injunction hearing that enjoins defendants, AUAP’s officers, agents, employees, servants, privies, successors and assigns, attorneys and representatives, and all persons and organizations in active participation and combination with it, from
(a) using any of AACRAO’s trademarks including AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGIATE REGISTRARS AND ADMISSIONS OFFICERS and AACRAO or any other name or mark confusingly similar thereto or using any counterfeit or colorable imitation thereof, or using the name or mark along or in combination with other words, names, styles, titles or marks in connection with the rendering or the advertising or promotion of related goods or services including (A) on AUAP’s website located at the URL www.auap.com; (B) on presentation materials; (C) on evaluation documents; and (D) on business letterhead or facsimile cover sheets;
(viii) That AACRAO be awarded the damages it has sustained by defendants’ actions, its costs and disbursement in this action, and defendants’ profits (of statutory damages if so elected by AACRAO), and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;