Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 1 of 19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------------------------------------X
MICHAEL A. MEDINA,
Plaintiff,

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Civil Action No.: 15cv2551(KBF)

- against DASH FILMS INC., DAMON DASH

PROMOTIONS LLC, DAMON DASH MUSIC
GROUP LLC, DAMON DASH ENTERPRISES
I LLC, DAMON DASH, and KANYE WEST,
Defendants.
-----------------------------------------------------------------X
Plaintiff, Michael A. Medina, brings this second amended complaint against
Defendants, Dash Films Inc., Damon Dash Promotions LLC, Damon Dash Music Group
LLC, Damon Dash Enterprises I LLC, Damon Dash, and Kanye West, alleging as
follows:
DEFINITIONS
1. Loisaidas Clips refers to a series of short music videos entitled Loisaidas
produced by Defendants in 2015 and featuring a group that Defendants named
Loisaidas in 2015.
NATURE OF THE CASE
2. Plaintiff Michael A. Medina is an individual that started a Latin band performing
original musical compositions and sound recordings. In or about 2008, Mr. Medina
coined the name LOISAIDAS to identify music videos, musical performances, marketing
material, CD's, and other media from which the performances could be obtained by the
purchasing public.

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 2 of 19

3. In or about 2011, Mr. Medina applied for and obtained Registered Trademarks
for the LOISAIDAS word mark in Classes 9, 16, and 41 (hereinafter the Loisaidas
Trademarks).
4. On or about March of 2015, the Defendants Damon Dash and Kanye West,
along with their companies and organizations, began using the same exact mark
LOISAIDAS to identify the Loisaidas Clips.
5. Defendants LOISAIDAS Clips graphically depict a violent gangster-infused world
where drug dealing, mob wars, and murder are not only accepted as routine but are
glorified as a sort of nirvana.
6. As one can imagine, this kind of an association of the LOISAIDAS word mark
with the LOISAIDAS Clips, is anathema to the Latin music and videos being marketed
and sold by the plaintiff under the LOISAIDAS trademarks.

PARTIES
7. Plaintiff, Michael A. Medina, is an individual residing in New York, New York
10002.
8. Plaintiff is in the business of inter alia, offering musical entertainment including,
but not limited to, musical records, musical videos, and film pilots in the
entertainment industry.
9. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Dash Films Inc., is a Delaware
corporation with a place of business in the borough of Manhattan, City and State
of New York.
10. Upon information and belief, Damon Dash Promotions LLC, is a Delaware limited
liability company doing business in the City and State of New York.
2

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 3 of 19

11. Upon information and belief, Damon Dash Music Group LLC, is a Delaware
limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1501 Broadway,
New York, New York 10036.
12. Upon information and belief, Damon Dash Enterprises I LLC, is a Delaware
limited liability company with a place of business in the borough of Manhattan,
City and State of New York.
13. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Damon Dash is an individual residing in
the City and State of New York, doing business in the State of New York,
regularly soliciting business from New York residents and deriving substantial
revenue from New York residents.
14. Upon information and belief, Damon Dash is domiciled in the State of New York.
15. Upon information and belief, Defendant Kanye West is an individual with a place
of residence in the borough of Manhattan.
16. Upon information and belief, Kanye West is domiciled in the State of New York.
17. Kanye West owns a residence at 25 West Houston Street Apt. 4B, in the City and
State of New York.
18. Upon information and belief, Defendant Kanye West is an individual residing in
the City and State of New York, doing business in the State of New York,
regularly soliciting business from New York residents and deriving substantial
revenue from New York residents.

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 4 of 19

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

19. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.,
15 U.S.C. 1114-1116; under 43(a) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)
and 43(c) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125 (c).
20. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because Defendants
engaged in continuous business activities in, and directed to, the State of New
York within this judicial district and because, upon information and belief,
Defendants Damon Dash and Kanye West reside in New York City, and because
Defendants have committed tortious acts aimed at and causing harm within the
State of New York and this judicial district.
21. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and (c)
because it is Plaintiffs place of residence and because Defendants transact
business in this district. Furthermore, a substantial portion of the events giving
rise to the asserted claims have occurred, and continue to occur, within this
district. Finally, the damage to Plaintiff and his intellectual property described
herein occurred and continues to occur in this judicial district.
FACTS
22. Since January 17, 2012, MEDINA has been and is now the title owner of
Registration # 4,086,336 for the word mark LOISAIDAS in International Classes
16 & 41. A copy of the Registration is annexed as Exhibit A.
23. Since February 8, 2011, MEDINA has been and is now the title owner of
Registration # 3,917,555 for the stylized mark LOISAIDAS in International
Classes 9.

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 5 of 19

24. Registration #3,917,555 includes: Audio tapes featuring music; Compact discs
featuring music; Digital music downloadable from the Internet; Digital photo
frames for displaying digital pictures, video clips and music; Downloadable MP3
files, MP3 recordings, on-line discussion boards, webcasts and podcasts
featuring music, audio books and news broadcasts; Downloadable musical
sound recordings; Downloadable ring tones, graphics and music via a global
computer network and wireless devices; Downloadable video recordings
featuring musical performances by Loisaidas; Downloadable Loisaidas music via
the internet and wireless devices; Juke boxes; Music recordings sold as a kit with
a mask; Musical sound recordings; Musical video recordings; Visual recordings
and audiovisual recordings featuring music and animation.
25. The word LOISAIDAS is arbitrary as it refers to the goods and services offered
by the Plaintiff under the trademark.
26. The word LOISAIDAS is arbitrary as it refers to the goods and services offered
by the Defendants under the trademark.
27. The word LOISAIDAS does not describe or suggest the Defendants goods or
services.
28. The word LOISAIDAS does not describe or suggest the Plaintiffs goods or
services.
29. Plaintiffs use of the LOISAIDAS trademark for its goods and services is
inherently distinctive.
30. Plaintiffs use of the LOISAIDAS trademark for its goods and services has
substantial secondary meaning in the marketplace.
5

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 6 of 19

31. Plaintiffs goods and services under the LOISAIDAS brand were and are sold
and available for sale on www.amazon.com, www.itunes.com, and other outlets.
32. Plaintiffs goods and services identified by the LOISAIDAS mark have reached a
twenty (20) plus week run on Billboard Latin Tropical Airplay, reaching as high as
number eight (8).
33. Plaintiffs goods and services identified by the LOISAIDAS mark has risen to the
top two (2) on New Yorks number one Tropical Latin station LaMega 97.9. See
Exhibit B.
34. The LOISAIDAS self-titled debut album was the number one Top Pop Latin
Album on iTunes and was the number one best seller in Latin music on Amazon.
See Exhibit C.
35. Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS brand musical videos and short Clips pilots are available
for purchase on YouTube, VEVO and various other forums.
36. Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS goods and services have a nationwide following.
37. Damon Dash is one of the founding members of urban music label Roc-A-Fella
Records that was co-owned by Sean Carter p/k/a JAY Z.
38. Defendants were aware of Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS goods and services before they
decided to use the same word mark LOISAIDAS to identify their goods and
services.
39. Defendant Kanye West is a renowned recording artist that has recorded tracks,
albums, CDs and performed live on numerous occasions on tour and for audio
and video recordings.

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 7 of 19

40. Defendants, Dash Films Inc., Damon Dash Promotions LLC, Damon Dash Music
Group LLC, Damon Dash Enterprises I LLC were served with the Amended
Complaint on May 26, 2015 and failed to timely respond.
41. Defendants, Dash Films Inc., Damon Dash Promotions LLC, Damon Dash Music
Group LLC, Damon Dash Enterprises I LLC are in default.
42. Upon Requests dated June 24, Certificates of Default were entered by the Clerk
of the Court pursuant to Rule 55(a) on June 25, 2015 as to Defendants, Dash
Films Inc., Damon Dash Promotions LLC, Damon Dash Music Group LLC,
Damon Dash Enterprises I LLC.
43. Defendants are in the business of inter alia songwriting, signing of musicians,
musical performance, music video production, laying down tracks for CDs,
promoting music, and producing music.
44. Defendant Kanye West was aware of Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS mark before 2015.
45. After he became aware of the LOISADAS trademarks, in 2015, Mr. West named
Defendants group of gangsta rappers by the same name, LOISAIDAS.
46. Defendant Damon Dash was aware of Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS mark before 2015.
47. After he became aware of the LOISADAS trademarks, in 2015, Mr. Dash named
Defendants group of gangsta rappers by the same name, LOISAIDAS.
48. Mr. West and Mr. Dash worked together to name and promote the Defendants
group as LOISAIDAS and produced their music under the name LOISAIDAS.
49. In 2015, despite the knowledge of the LOISADAS trademarks, Mr. West decided
to name a series of music videos by the same name Loisaidas.
50. In 2015, despite the knowledge of the LOISADAS trademarks, Mr. Dash decided
to name a series of music videos by the same name Loisaidas.
7

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 8 of 19

51. Mr. West and Mr. Dash worked together in conjunction with the other
Defendants, in naming and promoting the Loisaidas Clips despite the fact that
the Plaintiff had already named and promoted another group by the same name
and had trademarked the name Loisaidas in the same and similar categories.
52. Kanye West is the executive producer of the Defendants LOISAIDAS Clips. See
Exhibit D.
53. Defendant Kanye West authorized, directed and participated in the infringement
of the LOISAIDAS marks as herein described.
54. Defendant Damon Dash authorized, directed and participated in the infringement
of the LOISAIDAS marks as herein described.
55. Defendants LOISAIDAS clips graphically depict murder, violence and drug
sales. Exhibit E is a screen shot from one of the Clips.
56. Defendants goods and services identified by the LOISAIDAS mark are and have
been being offered for sale and sold via social media and through the website
www.loisaidasthemovie.com since at least March of 2015.
57. Defendants goods and services identified by the LOISAIDAS mark are and have
been advertised, promoted and marketed via social media and through the
website www.loisaidasthemovie.com since at least February of 2015.
58. Actual confusion between the parties respective LOISAIDAS brand goods and
services has occurred and is occurring.
59. An appreciable number of the relevant public mistakenly believed and will
continue to believe that the word mark LOISAIDAS originated with Defendants
goods and services unless this Court halts Defendants use of LOISAIDAS.
60. The relevant consumers are likely to confuse Defendants LOISAIDAS music
8

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 9 of 19

videos with Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS music, videos and marks.

61. Defendants used the word mark LOISAIDAS in commerce to identify a group of
rappers, videos and music, long after Plaintiff adopted and first used the same
trademark in commerce to identify Plaintiffs goods and services.
62. In the short time that Defendants have used the LOISAIDAS mark, due to the
widespread advertising and promotions, upon information and belief, due to the
powerful name recognition of Kanye West and the Defendants promotion,
Defendants sales exceed that of Plaintiff, the senior holder.

COUNT I TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT OF FEDERALLY

REGISTERED TRADEMARKS
63. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 62 as if
fully set forth herein.
64. No earlier than 2014, Defendants decided to promote a gangsta rap group
through a series of music videos.
65. Gangsta rap is a subgenre of hip hop music that reflects a violent lifestyle of
afflicted with poverty and the dangers of drug use and drug dealing.
66. Songs tell the stories of gangsta life filled with narratives of hustling in the
streets, an aggressive in your face attitude toward life, and the materialism of
street dreamsGangsta rap is known for its ghetto life narratives that depict
realities of gang life or life where violence is ever present.
67. Music videos are a special type of production which involve a combination of a
story and music.
68. In order to integrate and successfully promote the Defendants new gangsta rap

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 10 of 19

group, the Defendants planned to produce music video type clips that infused
violence, drug dealing, and gang activity around the gangsta rap music.
69. At some point Defendants decided to name the gangsta rappers with the same
name used to identify Plaintiffs bachata band, LOISAIDAS.
70. Defendants were aware that Plaintiff owned the registered trademark for the
word mark LOISAIDAS but decided that it was an exciting name that would be
attractive to the market, and therefore decided to steal the name.
71. In 2015, while the Defendants were preparing to launch the first such music
video, Plaintiff showed up at a recording site and informed Defendants that they
were infringing upon his LOISAIDAS registered trademark.
72. Defendants ignored this warning and came out with the first music video.
73. In April of 2015, the Plaintiff who was then pro se, sued the Defendants Damond
Dash and Kanye West for infringement upon the LOISAIDAS trademark.
74. Defendants were unphased by the lawsuit and in fact in social media and
elsewhere, ridiculed Plaintiff for bringing the action to protect his registered
trademark. In one post, Defendant Damond Dash argues that Plaintiff does not
even own the trademark.
75. Defendants continued producing music videos, 11 more, each approximately 10
minutes in length and mimicking the style of the first video, providing gangsta rap
by a group known as LOISAIDAS, along with a detached story line pursuant to
the registered trademarks owned by the Plaintiff, Plaintiff has the exclusive right
to use the word mark LOISAIDAS in conjunction with the services and goods that
are listed in the registrations. See paragraphs 22, 23, and 24.

10

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 11 of 19

76. The Defendants are clearly infringing upon that right by utilizing the word mark
LOISAIDAS to identify visual recordings, musical sound recordings, musical
video recordings, video clips and music, online discussion boards and webcasts,
downloadable video recordings, downloadable LOISAIDAS music, and now a
soundtrack that Defendants have produced, also called LOISAIDAS.
77. Long after the adoption and use by Plaintiff of the LOISAIDAS Trademark, and
with at least constructive notice of the Plaintiffs Trademark, Defendants
knowingly and intentionally used an identical and slightly identical version of
Plaintiffs registered mark to manufacture, sell and distribute their Clips.
78. Upon information and belief, Defendants have offered for sale products using the
same name, LOISAIDAS, after the mark was registered to the Plaintiff.
79. Defendants, by their acts as aforesaid, have taken advantage of the creative skill
of Plaintiff.
80. Defendants have advertised, promoted, marketed and/or sold their products
under the name LOISAIDAS.
81. Defendants injected their products into commerce with the express intent of
profiting from Plaintiffs valuable registered trademark.
82. Defendants did not conduct a trademark search before using LOISAIDAS in
commerce.
83. Defendants did not search the USPTO website before using LOISAIDAS in
commerce.
84. Defendants did not search the internet before using LOISAIDAS in commerce.
85. Upon information and belief, Defendants actions have been willful, deliberate,
and in bad faith.
11

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 12 of 19

86. The products and services that Defendants have sold under the LOISAIDAS
mark are the same or similar to the products and services upon which the
Plaintiff has placed the LOISAIDAS mark.
87. The Defendants actions are likely to cause confusion among an appreciable
number of ordinary prudent consumers as to the source, origin, sponsorship,
approval or affiliation of the Defendants services and/or products with Plaintiffs
services and/or products.
88. The activities of Defendants, complained of herein, constitute infringement of the
LOISAIDAS Trademarks in violation of Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.
Section 1114(1).
COUNT II FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN (15 U.S.C. 1125(a))

89. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 88 as if

fully set forth herein.
90. Having adopted and used LOISAIDAS after Plaintiff, Defendants are the junior
users of the mark.
91. Plaintiff has priority in the LOISAIDAS mark as to goods and services set forth in
the Loisaidas Trademarks.
92. Plaintiff used the mark LOISAIDAS in commerce with respect to same or similar
goods before Defendants and as such Plaintiff is the senior user.
93. Since before Defendants began using LOISAIDAS, Plaintiff used the mark
LOISAIDAS in commerce with respect to the same or similar goods and services.
94. The Defendants use of Plaintiffs word mark results in confusion as to
sponsorship, association, source and origin of the Plaintiffs and Defendants

12

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 13 of 19

products.
95. The acts of Defendants complained of herein have been without the
authorization or consent of Plaintiff.
96. Defendants acts alone, and via its customers, have caused and will continue to
cause irreparable harm and injury to Plaintiff.
97. Section 43 (a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1125(a) sets forth in
pertinent part:
(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or
services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word,
term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any
false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or
false or misleading representation of fact, which
(A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such
person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship,
or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial
activities by another person, or
(B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the
nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or
her or another persons goods, services, or commercial
activities,
shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or
she is likely to be damaged by such act.
98. As a result of Defendants conduct, the public has already believed and is likely
to continue to believe that Plaintiffs goods and services are in some way
associated with, affiliated with and/or originating from the publishers and/or
sponsors of the LOISAIDAS Clips sold and/or promoted by Defendants.
99. Upon information and belief, Defendants have willfully infringed upon the
LOISAIDAS trademarks.
13

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 14 of 19

100.

The Defendants acts constitute false designation of origin, false or

misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which

is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to affiliation,
connection, or association of Defendants with Plaintiff, or as to the origin,
sponsorship, or affiliation of Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS goods and services with
Defendants.
101.

Upon information and belief, there is actual confusion among the potential

consumers of Plaintiffs brand as to the source of the LOISAIDAS trademark.

102.

Upon information and belief, there is actual confusion among the potential

consumers of Defendants Clips as to the source of the LOISAIDAS trademark.

103.

Defendants use of LOISAIDAS is without the license or consent of

Plaintiff.
104.

Defendants aforesaid acts constitute violation of 43(a) of the Lanham

Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).

105.

Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, substantial and irreparable

injury as a result of Defendants infringement of Plaintiffs mark and will continue

to do so unless enjoined by this Court.
106.

Defendants have engaged in acts of unfair competition, false designation

of origin, and false description or representation in violation of 43(a) of the

Lanham act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
107.

Upon information and belief, Defendants have intentionally engaged in

acts of false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false

or misleading representation of fact, which are likely to cause confusion, or to
cause mistake, or to deceive as to affiliation, connection, or association of
14

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 15 of 19

Defendants with Plaintiff, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or affiliation of

Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS with Defendants.
108.

Defendants aforesaid acts constitute unfair competition, false designation

of origin, and/or false description or representation in violation of 43(a) of the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
109.

Plaintiff has suffered irreparable injury as a result of the Defendants

infringement of Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS trademark.

110.

Defendants have engaged in trademark infringement and unfair

competition by causing a likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to the

source, sponsorship, approval or certification of the Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS
products.
111.

Defendants have engaged in trademark infringement and unfair

competition by causing a likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to

affiliation, connection or association of the Plaintiffs products with the
Defendants products.
112.

Plaintiff has not consented to any sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation,

or connection with the Defendants Clips.

113.

Plaintiff has been irreparably damaged, and will continue to be damaged

by Defendants trademark infringement.

114.

Plaintiff has the right to control his reputation and the Defendants actions

in linking the Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS brand with the LOISAIDAS Clips tarnishes
the senior users reputation while unjustly enriching the junior user.

15

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 16 of 19

COUNT III STATE LAW CLAIMS

115.

Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through

114 as if fully set forth herein.

116.

Defendants acts constitute deception, fraud, false pretense, false

promise, misrepresentation, or the concealment, suppression or omission of a

material fact.
117.

Upon information and belief, Defendants intended that others rely upon

these unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive trade practices.

118.

Defendants deceptive business practices involve conduct addressed to

the market generally and implicate consumer protection concerns because the
deceptive practices have caused injury to consumers. Unless Defendants acts
are restrained by this Court, Defendants deceptive business practices will
continue and the public will continue to suffer great and irreparable injury.
119.

Defendants acts have harmed Plaintiffs reputation and have severely

damaged Plaintiffs goodwill.

120.

Defendants have unfairly competed with Plaintiff by selling the

LOISAIDAS Clips to purchasers under a mark that is confusingly similar to

Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS mark. The public is likely to be confused as to the source
and origin of Plaintiffs brand.
121.

Defendants have misappropriated Plaintiff's trade name, by selling Clips

under a mark that is confusingly similar to Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS mark.

122.

Defendants trade name infringement is in violation of the common law of

New York.

16

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 17 of 19

123.

Defendants aforesaid acts constitute infringement, tarnishment, dilution,

misappropriation, and misuse of Plaintiffs trade dress and trademark, unfair

competition, palming-off and passing-off against Plaintiff, and unjust enrichment
by Defendants, all in violation of Plaintiffs rights under the common law of New
York.
124.

Defendants aforesaid acts are likely to cause confusion, or to cause

mistake, or to deceive as to affiliation, connection, or association with Plaintiff, or

origin, sponsorship, or affiliation of Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS by Defendants. The
public is likely to be confused as to the source, origin, sponsorship, approval or
certification of Plaintiffs LOISAIDAS trademark.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays:
A.

That this Court adjudge that the Defendants have infringed Plaintiffs

LOISAIDAS trademark, and committed consumer fraud as set forth in this

Complaint, in violation of Plaintiffs rights under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.
1114, 1125(a), New York statutory and common law.
B.

That Plaintiff recover Defendants profits and the damages arising from

Defendants acts pursuant to New York Law and 15 U.S.C. 1117(a) along with
costs and fees as allowed under 15 U.S.C. 1117 (a).
C.

That Defendants and all owners, officers, directors, agents, servants,

employees, affiliates, attorneys, successors, and assigns, and all persons in

active concert or participation therewith, including but not limited to their
distributors and retailers, be preliminarily and permanently enjoined and
restrained from (1) reproducing, copying, displaying, the word mark LOISAIDAS
or any mark similar to, or substantially indistinguishable therefrom, and (2)
advertising, promoting, importing, selling, marketing, offering for sale or

17

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 18 of 19

otherwise distributing their infringing products in connection with the word mark
LOISAIDAS or any mark similar to, or substantially indistinguishable therefrom,
and (3) holding themselves out as, or otherwise representing themselves to be,
the owners of, or otherwise authorized to use, the LOISAIDAS trademarks or (4)
from in any other way infringing the LOISAIDAS trademarks or (5) effecting
assignments or transfers, forming new entities or associations or utilizing any
other means or devices for the purpose of circumventing or otherwise avoiding
the prohibitions set forth in numbers (1) through (4) hereof.
D.
That Defendants be directed to file with this Court and to serve upon
Plaintiff within three (3) days after service of the injunction issued in this action, a
written report under oath, setting forth in detail the manner of compliance with
paragraph C, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1116.
E.

That Plaintiff recover Defendants revenue less allowable deductions

Defendant can pursuant to both New York law and the Lanham Act.

JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff respectfully requests a trial by jury as to all issues.

Dated: New York, New York

September 16, 2015

Respectfully submitted,
THE BOSTANY LAW FIRM, PLLC

By:___s/John P. Bostany________________
John P. Bostany (JB 1986)
Charen Kim (CK 6768)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
40 Wall Street, 28th Floor
New York, New York 10005
(212) 530-4400
18

Case 1:15-cv-02551-KBF Document 57 Filed 09/16/15 Page 19 of 19