Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/185065281/Stat-v-Beard-Head-Et-Al
Timestamp: 2015-11-29 10:41:40
Document Index: 286141072

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 43', '§ 1125', '§1331', '§ 1367', '§ 1338', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 284', '§ 289', '§ 285']

P. 1Stat v. Beard Head Et. Al.Stat v. Beard Head Et. Al.|Views: 13|Likes: 0Published by PatentBlastStat v. Beard Head et. al. Stat v. Beard Head et. al. More info:Published by: PatentBlast on Nov 18, 2013Copyright: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/185065281/Stat-v-Beard-Head-Et-Al11/18/2013pdftextoriginalFILEDUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
MIJ NOV 13 P in 35
C>? fy ASr°if7a,cT COURT
ALEXANDRA. VIRGINIA
STAT LTD. dba BEARDO
P.M.B. 2, Caribbean Place Providenciales, Turks & Caicos Islands
CaseNo. r,\3-&HW
880 Apollo Street, Suite 140 El Segundo, CA 90245
BEARDED APPAREL LLC
816 S. Bundy Avenue, No. 11 Los Angeles, C 90049
816 S. Bundy Drive, Suite 11 Los Angeles, CA 90049
NEON EATERS, LLC
165 North 1330 West Suite A7
Plaintiff states the following for its Complaint against defendants BEARD HEAD, INC.,
BEARDED APPAREL LLC, DAVID STANKUNAS, and NEON EATERS (collectively
"Defendants"):
This is an action for injunctive relief and damages arising from Defendants'
design patent infringement, trade dress infringement, and unfair competition in violation of the laws of the United States and the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Plaintiff STAT Ltd., d/b/a BEARDO ("BEARDO") is a Limited Company
incorporated in the Turks and Caicos Islands. BEARDO's products are sold, and offered for sale,
globally, including in this Judicial District, and they have received significant publicity for their
innovative design. BEARDO owns Design Patent No. D692,186 for a combined ski facemask
BEARDO also has trade dress protection for its unique and distinctive product
3. On information and belief, Defendant BEARD HEAD, Inc. ("BEARD HEAD") is
a California corporation with a principal place of business at 880 Apollo Street, Suite 140, El
BEARD HEAD has previously been accused of copying other designs. For
instance, in January 2010, the Icelandic company Vik Prjonsdottir stated on their website:
"Sadly, it seems that honesty can be a difficult for some people and thats [sic] the case with the
people behind the fake brand Beardhead. These people have copied Vik Prjonsdottir's Beardcap,
started a company and are selling it around the world. Scandinavian Grace, our former retailers
in New York, even have a documentation that they ordered a Beardcap from the store in January
On information and belief, Defendant BEARDED APPAREL, Inc. ("BEARDED
APPAREL") is a California corporation with a principle place of business at 816 S. Bundy
Avenue, No. 11, Los Angeles, CA 90049. Plaintiff is informed and believes that BEARDED
APPAREL and BEARD HEAD are the same entity, or that, alternatively, BEARDED
APPAREL owns and/or controls BEARD HEAD.
On information and belief, Defendant DAVID STANKUNAS ("STANKUNAS")
owns and/or controls BEARDED APPAREL and BEARD HEAD. STANKUNAS, BEARD
HEAD, and BEARDED APPAREL are referred to collectively herein as "the BEARD HEAD
On information and belief, Defendant NEON EATERS LLC ("NEON EATERS")
is a Utah limited liability company with a principal place of business at 165 North 1330 West,
Suite A7, Orem, Utah 84057.
This action is for injunctive relief and for damages for design patent infringement,
trade dress infringement, and unfair competition under the laws of the United States of America,
and for trade dress infringement and unfair competition under the laws of the Commonwealth of
This action arises under federal laws relating to design patent infringement arising
under 35 U.S.C. § 1 et. seq., and under federal laws relating to trade dress infringement and
unfair competition under the Lanham Act § 43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a),
This Court has subject matterjurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1338(a).
This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the claims that arise under the laws
of the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), because such claims are so
related to the federal claims brought herein that they form part of the samecase or controversy.
Venue is proper in this Court under28 U.S.C. § 1338(a), 1391(b), and/or 1400(b).
This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants, who make their items
available for purchase to persons in this District through retail websites accessible to, and directed towards, the citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Further, the BEARD HEAD
Defendants have systemic commercial contacts with this District, in that they sponsor events, festivals, and contests in this District, during which they promote and sell the infringing products
at issue subjudice.
BEARDO designs, creates, and sells apparel and accessories, including an array
of "Beard Hats," which are knit caps with an attached or an attachable face mask.
15. BEARDO's Beard Hats have received significant national and international
publicity. For instance, BEARDO's products have been featured on USAToday.com, on BBC
Radio, in Cosmopolitan Magazine, in Canadian Geographic magazine, on Live! with Kelly & Michael, on Ripley's Believe It or Not!, and in a number of other publications, forums, and
BEARDO has taken steps to protect its innovations and marks. BEARDO (and/or
its owner) have secured patents in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom.
BEARDO owns Design Patent No. D692,186, issued on October 22, 2013 ("the '186 patent"),
for a combined ski facemask and hat. A copy of the ' 186 patent is attached as Exhibit A.
BEARDO (or any predecessors in interest) has owned all rights, title, and interest
to the' 186 patent since the ' 186 patent issued.
BEARDO's ownership of the '186 patent includes, without limitation, the
exclusive right to enforce the '186 patent, the exclusive right to file actions arising from
infringement of the '186 patent, the exclusive right to recover damages for infringement of the
'186 patent, and the exclusive right to seek injunctive relief for infringement of the '186 patent.
19. In order to identify its products, including its combined ski facemask and hat
products, BEARDO (and/or its owner) have invested significant time, effort, and money to create
new and unique trade dress. This new and unique trade dress is embodied in the packaging of
BEARDO's combined ski facemask and hat products, and in the design of BEARDO's combined
facemask and hat products. BEARDO has acquired exclusive and protectable trade dress rights embodied in this packaging and design, and has used and continues to use this trade dress. This trade dress, as a result of BEARDO's (and/or its owner's) extensive use, sales, and promotion, has become a valuable and important asset that designates the products as belonging exclusively
to BEARDO.
The BEARDO brand is well known to consumers, and consumers identify the
design of the combined facemask and hat as BEARDO products, or products emanating from BEARDO, to distinguish BEARDO products from other products, and to identify the premium
quality and value of BEARDO products.
BEARDO's design is inherently distinctive, or alternatively, has acquired
secondary meaning. The famousness and popularity of BEARDO's design is reflected in the significant efforts BEARDO (and/or its owner) have taken to publicize its product, in the
significant publicity BEARDO's design has received, and by its significant popularity amongst
consumers of combined ski facemasks and hats. For instance, BEARDO has, as of November 13,
http://www.facebook.com/beardowear).
Conversely, Defendant
BEARD HEAD, has
approximately 15,869 "likes" (see http://\vww.facebook.com/beardheads'> and Defendant NEON
http://vvavw.facebook.com/neoneaters1.
BEARDO's design has been famous before Defendant's infringing activity.
The BEARD HEAD Defendants' Design Patent Infringement
On information and belief, the BEARD HEAD Defendants have offered for sale,
sold, and continue to sell, in the United States, products with a design covered by the '186 patent. These infringing products include the BEARD HEAD "Stubble" product, the BEARD
HEAD "Short" product, and the BEARD HEAD "Long" product (depicted in Figure 1 below).
The BEARD HEAD Defendants' infringing "Stubble," "Short," and "Long"
products are available for purchase on BEARD HEAD'S website, which is accessible to, and
directed towards, consumers in this District.
BEARDO has not authorized or licensed the BEARD HEAD Defendants (nor any
of the BEARD HEAD Defendants' agents, officers, or affiliates) to offer to sell or to sell
products with a design covered by the ' 186 patent. The BEARD HEAD Defendants do not have
any license or authorization to do so.
Figure 1 below shows examples of the BEARD HEAD Defendants' infringing
BEARDO's '186 patent (left) with images of some
products by comparing figures from
exemplary infringing products sold by the BEARD HEAD Defendants (right).
Figure 1; Comparison of Exemplary Infringing BEARD HEAD Products to the '186 Patent
'186 Patent
Exemplary Infringing BEARD HEAD Product
s~ ^
FIG2 V V.
•<.,,
•±~^s
BEARD HEAD "Stubble" Product
\:V'-
^:f""t^ Jm
FIG 3 N^.
BEARD HEAD "Short" Product
X.*-"—
f,g2 V x
BEARD HEAD "Long" Product
'^</•• '/'•'/•
r-7~r'%-T.
'/'///,,">'/',f////^y
The BEARD HEAD Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe
BEARDO's '186 patent at least by selling and/or offering to sell the infringing products without
BEARDO's authorization or license.
BEARDO has sold and continues to sell products bearing the design claimed in
the ' 186 patent. BEARDO has provided notice of its patent directly to the BEARD HEAD
Defendants and to the public on BEARDO's website.
28. On information and belief, the BEARD HEAD Defendants' violations and
continued violation of the ' 186 patent have been, and continue to be, intentional and willful.
NEON EA TERS Design Patent Infringement
On information and belief, NEON EATERS have offered for sale, sold, and
continue to sell, in the United States, products with a design covered by the '186 patent. This
includes the NEON EATERS "Lumberjack" and "Santa" beard hats. 30. NEON EATERS' infringing "Lumberjack" and "Santa" products are available for
purchase on NEON EATERS' website, which is accessible to, and directed towards, consumers
BEARDO has not authorized or licensed NEON EATERS (nor any of its agents,
officers, or affiliates) to offer to sell or to sell products with a design covered by the ' 186patent.
NEON EATERS has no authorization or license to do so.
Figure 2 below shows examples of the NEON EATERS infringing products by
comparing figures from the ' 186 patent (left) with images of the exemplary infringing products
sold by NEON EATERS (right).
Figure 2; Comparison of Exemplary Infringing NEON EATERS Products
to the'186 Patent
Exemplary Infringing NEON EATERS Product
"<.«'.,
BEANIE - 'LUMBERJACK"
p«-» $26.00
NEON EATERS "Lumberjack" Product
-....-^/1
BEANIE • 'LUMBERJACK"
Fv»-e $26.00
~**^ifaS;S«ft2j«.
H£AN€
1TKO $26.00
NEON EATERS "Santa" Product
^t Nf~~-—
i-'* z ^ -v'-/ • • /'
• '•J.J-*-——V
%. x^ FIG 3 X,
) /j
H£AN€ -"SANTA"
in^ $26.00
NEON EATERS has infringed and continue to infringe the ' 186 patent at least by
selling and/or offering to sell the infringing products without BEARDO's authorization or
NEON EATERS has sold and continues to sell products bearing the design
claimed in the '186 patent. BEARDO has provided notice of its patent to the public on
BEARDO's website.
On information and belief, NEON EATERS' violations and continued violation
of the ' 186 patent have been, and continue to be, intentional and willful.
BEARD HEAD's Trade Dress Infringement and Unfair Competition (Packaging)
BEARDO has expended substantial time, effort, and money to create innovative,
unique, non-functional, and inherently distinct packaging for its products, including the
combined ski facemask and hat. This packaging identifies the source of the products as
originating from BEARDO.
The BEARD HEAD Defendants knowingly and intentionally have sold, and
continue to sell, without authorization or license, items in packaging that is identical (or
substantially similar) in size, shape, color, graphics, and look to BEARDO's packaging.
Rather than undertake the effort to develop their own product packaging trade
dress, the BEARD HEAD Defendants simply copied BEARDO's product packaging trade dress causing substantial consumer confusion and dilution of BEARDO's intellectual property.
39. On or about August 21, 2013, at a trade show in Las Vegas, Mr. STANKUNAS,
individually and on behalf of the BEARD HEAD Defendants, marketed infringing BEARD
HEAD products to specialty retailers, distributors, and the public. At that trade show, when
asked about the similarity between the BEARD HEAD packaging and BEARDO's packaging,
STANKUNAS indicated that BEARD HEAD copied BEARDO's packaging for its infringing
Figure 3 demonstrates the BEARD HEAD Defendants' trade dress infringement
as to BEARDO's packaging. The top item in Figure 3 is the infringing BEARD HEAD packaging and the bottom item in Figure 3 is the original BEARDO packaging that the BEARD
HEAD Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe.
Figure 3: Comparison of BEARDO and BEARD HEAD Packaging
BEARD HEAD and NEON EATERS' Trade Dress Infringement and Unfair Competition
The design of the BEARD HEAD Defendants' infringing products (shown in
Figure 1 above) and NEON EATERS' infringing products (shown in Figure 2 above) is
substantially similar to the design of BEARDO's combined ski facemask and hat, which is not
essential to the use or purpose of the product, does not affect the cost or quality of the product (as
evidenced, e.g. by the issuance of a design patent over the design), is distinctive, identifies
products as emanating from BEARDO, and which BEARDO has invested significant time,
effort, and money in developing.
Defendants' trade dress infringement as to BEARDO's design has in fact caused
and continues to cause confusion amongst consumers and retailers as to the origin of BEARDO's
products. BEARDO has, for example, received correspondence from retailers regarding what
they believe to be BEARDO's superior products, when they are in fact carrying the BEARD
HEAD Defendants' inferior and infringing product. Defendants' trade dress infringement as to
BEARDO's design is likely to continue to cause consumer confusion.
Defendants' infringing products have diluted and tarnished the value of the
BEARDO brand by associating the BEARDO brand with lower quality products.
COUNT 1: DESIGN PATENT INFRINGEMENT
BEARDO incorporates by reference and re-alleges herein the foregoing and
Defendants have made, offered to sell, sold, and/or imported into the United
States, and are making, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing into the United States, products
that infringe the '186 patent, without BEARDO's authorization or license.
Examples of Defendants' infringing products are depicted in Figures 1 and 2
above. Defendants will continue to manufacture, offer to sell, sell, and/or import their infringing products unless enjoined by this Court.
47. On information and belief, Defendants' infringement has been intentional and
willful, making this an exceptional case.
Due to Defendants' infringement of the ' 186 patent, BEARDO has suffered, is
49. Due to Defendants' infringement of the ' 186 patent, Defendants have profited and
are profiting, and BEARDO has been and is being damaged and losing profit. BEARDO is
entitled to recover damages from Defendants, including, inter alia, the total profit derived by
Defendants by their infringement of the '186 patent, in an amount to be proven at trial.
COUNT 2: FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION AND
TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT (PRODUCT PACKAGING)
(Against The BEARD HEAD Defendants)
BEARDO has acquired exclusive and protectable trade dress rights embodied in
its non-functional and inherently distinctive product packaging for its combined ski facemask
and hat. By its acts and omissions, the BEARD HEAD Defendants violate Section 43(a) of the
Lanham Act and are unfairly competing with BEARDO.
The BEARD HEAD Defendants' use in commerce of BEARDO's product
packaging trade dress constitutes a false designation of origin and a false and misleading
representation of fact that is likely to cause confusion, deception, and mistake. The BEARD
HEAD Defendants' use of BEARDO's product packaging trade dress wrongly suggests that
BEARD HEAD's inferior products are affiliated, connected, or associated with BEARDO; that
BEARD HEAD products are manufactured or distributed by BEARDO; or that BEARDO has
sponsored, endorsed, or approved the BEARD HEAD products, services, and commercial
The BEARD HEAD Defendants have infringed, and on information and belief,
continue to infringe, BEARDO's combined ski facemask and beard product packaging trade
The BEARD HEAD Defendants' beard hat products infringe BEARDO's product
packaging trade dress. 54. The BEARD HEAD Defendants' actions are intentional and willful, making this
Their actions demonstrate malicious intent by the BEARD HEAD
Defendants to trade on goodwill associated with BEARDO, causing significant and irreparable injury to BEARDO. This injury includes damage to BEARDO's goodwill and reputation, and BEARDO's ability to use its product packaging trade dress to indicate that its products come
from BEARDO.
Due to the BEARD HEAD Defendants' infringement of BEARDO's product
packaging trade dress, BEARDO has suffered, is suffering, and will continue to suffer
packaging trade dress, the BEARD HEAD Defendants have profited and are profiting, and
BEARDO has been and is being damaged and losing profit. BEARDO is entitled to recover
damages from the BEARD HEAD Defendants, including, inter alia, the total profit derived by
the BEARD HEAD Defendants' infringement of BEARDO's trade dress, in an amount to be
COUNT 3: FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT (PRODUCT DESIGN)
58. BEARDO's trade dress is not essential to the use or purpose of the product and
does not affect the cost or quality of the product (as evidenced, e.g. by the issuance of a design
patent over the design), is famous, and is distinctive. 59. BEARDO has acquired exclusive and protectable trade dress rights embodied in
its product design of its combined ski facemask and hat. By its acts and omissions, Defendants
violate Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act and are unfairly competing with BEARDO.
60. The Defendants' use in commerce of BEARDO's product design trade dress
constitutes a false designation of origin and a false and misleading representation of fact that is
likely to cause (and in fact has caused) confusion, deception, and mistake. Defendants' use of
BEARDO's product design trade dress wrongly suggests that Defendants' products are affiliated,
connected, or associated with BEARDO, that Defendants' products are manufactured or
distributed by BEARDO, or that BEARDO has sponsored, endorsed, or approved the
Defendants' products, services, and commercial activities.
Defendants have infringed, and continue to infringe, BEARDO's combined ski
facemask and beard product design trade dress. Defendants' beard hat products infringe
BEARDO's product design trade dress.
On information and belief, Defendants' actions are intentional and willful, making
this an exceptional case. Their actions demonstrate malicious intent by Defendants to trade on goodwill associated with BEARDO, causing significant and irreparable injury to BEARDO. This
injury includes damage to BEARDO's goodwill and reputation, and BEARDO's ability to use its
product design trade dress to indicate that its products come from BEARDO.
Due to the Defendants' infringement of BEARDO's product design trade dress,
BEARDO has suffered, is suffering, and will continue to suffer irreparable injury. 64. Due to Defendants' infringement of the BEARDO's product design trade dress,
Defendants have profited and are profiting, and BEARDO has been and is being damaged and losing profit. Therefore, BEARDO is entitled to recover damages from Defendants, including,
inter alia, the total profit derived by Defendants by their infringement of BEARDO's trade dress,
COUNT 4; COMMON LAW TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT
(Against the BEARD HEAD Defendants as to Product Packaging, and Against All Defendants as to Product Design)
BEARDO has acquired common law trade dress rights in its product packaging
and product design for the combined ski facemask and hat. Defendants' acts described herein are
likely to confuse and deceive, and on information and belief are deliberately calculated to
confuse and deceive, citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia and elsewhere as to the source and origin of their products.
67. Defendants' conduct constitutes violations of BEARDO's common law trade
dress rights and also constitutes unfair competition under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Virginia. 68. On information and belief, Defendants' actions are intentional, willful, and
undertaken with malice and in reckless disregard of BEARDO's rights.
Due to Defendants unfair competition and infringement of BEARDO's trade dress
rights, Defendants have profited and are profiting, and BEARDO has been and is being damaged
and losing profit. Therefore, BEARDO is entitled to recover damages from Defendants, including, inter alia, injunctive relief and the total profit derived by Defendants by their
infringement of BEARDO's trade dress, in an amount to be proven at trial.
WHEREFORE, BEARDO respectfully prays for: A. Judgment that the BEARD HEAD Defendants willfully infringed the BEARDO '186 Design Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a);
Judgment that NEON EATERS willfully infringed the BEARDO '186 Design
Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a);
An injunction against further infringement of the BEARDO Design Patent by any
and all Defendants, their agents, servants, employees, officers, and all others
controlled by any or all Defendants;
An award of damages adequate to compensate BEARDO for the patent
infringement that has occurred pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, which shall be trebled
as a result of Defendants' willful patent infringement, or an award of Defendants'
profits from their infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289, whichever is greater,
together with prejudgment interest and costs;
An assessment of costs, including reasonable attorney fees, pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
§ 285 with prejudgment interest;
Judgment that the BEARD HEAD Defendants willfully infringed BEARDO's
product packaging trade dress in violation of federal law and common law;
Judgment that Defendants willfully infringed BEARDO's product design trade
dress in violation of federal law and common law;
Judgment that Defendants competed unfairly with BEARDO;
That Defendants, and their officers, employees, and agents be forthwith
preliminarily and thereafter permanently enjoined and restrained from infringing
BEARDO's '186 Design Patent, from infringing BEARDO's trade dress rights,
and from unfairly competing against BEARDO; J. Judgment against Defendants to award BEARDO damages, lost profits, reasonable royalties, and other monetary amounts, including damages suffered on account of unfair competition and lost business opportunities, as authorized under
the Lanham Act and the common law of the Commonwealth of Virginia;
K. Judgment that such damages be trebled;
An order directing Defendants to pay punitive damages to BEARDO; Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
BEARDO demands a trial by jury.
DarueTS: Ward VSB 45978 WARD & WARD, PLLC 2020 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202)331-8160
Email: dan@wardlawdc.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF