Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 1 of 34 PageID: 63
Karen A. Confoy, Esq. Christopher R. Kinkade, Esq. FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP Princeton Pike Corporate Center 997 Lenox Drive, Building 3 Lawrenceville, NJ 08648-2311 Telephone: (609) 896-3600 Facsimile: (609) 896-1469 Email: [email protected] [email protected]
Jonathan D. Pressment, Esq. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP 30 Rockefeller Plaza, 26th Floor New York, NY 10112 Telephone: (212) 659-7300 Facsimile: (212) 918-8989 Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Defendant America Can!
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
KARS 4 KIDS INC., Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG
Plaintiff,
v.
AMERICA CAN!,
Defendant.
AMERICA CAN!’S ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS
America Can! (“America Can!”), by its attorneys, Haynes and Boone, LLP and Fox
Rothschild LLP, for its Answer to the Complaint filed by plaintiff Kars 4 Kids Inc. (“Kars” or
1 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 2 of 34 PageID: 64
“Plaintiff”) in this action, states on knowledge as to its own acts and on information and belief as
to all other matters except as indicated otherwise as follows:
1. In as much as a portion of Paragraph 1 of the Complaint attempts to characterize
the nature of the action and the claims set forth in the Complaint, no response is required. To the
extent a response to Paragraph 1 is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint, except refers to the content of Registration Number
4,130,622 for its terms, including Plaintiff’s claim that its alleged Kars 4 Kids mark was first
used in commerce in 2003 -- not 1998, and states that America Can! lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the alleged time and resources, if any, that Plaintiff
has purportedly used to promote, advertise and use its alleged marks in the United States, if any,
or its alleged rationales for doing so and, accordingly, denies each and every allegation
pertaining to such alleged time, resources and rationales.
2. To the extent Paragraph 2 of the Complaint provides a summary of the relief
being requested by Plaintiff and sets forth related conclusions of law, no response is required.
To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in
Paragraph 2 of the Complaint, except admits that America Can! uses the trademark CARS FOR
KIDS in connection with its charitable fundraising activities.
THE PARTIES
3. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of the Complaint and therefore denies each
and every allegation contained in Paragraph 3 of the Complaint.
2 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 3 of 34 PageID: 65
4. America Can! admits that it is a Texas not-for-profit corporation with an address
of 325 W. 12th Street, Suite 250, Dallas, Texas 75208, and that it solicits and/or receives
donations from individuals and entities throughout the United States -- including New Jersey.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. As Paragraph 5 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! admits that this Court has subject
matter jurisdiction to adjudicate this action, but otherwise denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 5 of the Complaint.
6. As Paragraph 6 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! admits that venue is proper in this
District but otherwise denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 6 of the
Complaint.
7. As Paragraph 7 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! admits it is subject to personal
jurisdiction in this District as a result of its charitable activities in the State of New Jersey, but
otherwise denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
8. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 8 of the
Complaint, except admits that it maintains websites at www.americascarsforkids.org and
www.carsforkids.org, which, upon information and belief, are accessible by persons and/or
entities in all states.
9. America Can! admits that it promotes its charitable fundraising services in
connection with its CARS FOR KIDS Mark through national advertising, including national
radio advertisements, which are heard throughout the United States, including in New Jersey.
3 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 4 of 34 PageID: 66
KARS 4 KIDS AND THE KARS 4 KIDS [ALLEGED] TRADEMARKS
10. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of the Complaint and, accordingly, denies
each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 10 of the Complaint, except states that even by
its own United States Patent and Trademark Office Registration Plaintiff’s first use in commerce
of the alleged KARS 4 KIDS mark was 2003.
11. To the extent Paragraph 11 of the Complaint attempts to summarize the terms and
contents of federal Registration Number 4,130,622, America Can! refers to the contents of
Registration Number 4,130,622 for its terms and contents and otherwise denies each and every
allegation contained in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint.
12. To the extent Paragraph 12 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 12
of the Complaint and, accordingly, denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 12 of
the Complaint.
13. To the extent Paragraph 13 of the Complaint attempts to summarize information
offered at the website located at www.kars4kids.com, America Can! refers to the
www.kars4kids.com website for its content. America Can! denies knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 13
of the Complaint and, accordingly, denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 13 of
the Complaint.
4 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 5 of 34 PageID: 67
14. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 of the Complaint and, accordingly, denies
each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 14 of the Complaint.
15. As Paragraph 15 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 15 of the Complaint to the extent that they attempt to characterize
Plaintiff’s purported use of its alleged KARS 4 KIDS marks, its alleged goodwill and reputation
among consumers and any alleged secondary meaning associated with Plaintiff’s alleged KARS
4 KIDS marks, and otherwise denies each and every remaining allegation contained in Paragraph
15 of the Complaint.
DEFENDANT’S [ALLEGED] UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES
16. America Can! admits that it has continuously used the phrase CARS FOR KIDS
in connection with its charitable fundraising activities including, among other things, collecting
and reselling used automobiles and states that it did not require Plaintiff’s consent or authority to
do so because Plaintiff is the junior user of a variation of America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS
Mark and America Can! did not require Plaintiff’s consent or authority in order to utilize its
CARS FOR KIDS Mark. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a
belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 16 of the Complaint
and, accordingly, denies each and every remaining allegation contained in Paragraph 16 of the
Complaint.
17. To the extent Paragraph 17 of the Complaint refers to the terms of a trademark
application filed by America Can!, America Can! refers to said application for its date and
contents and otherwise admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 17 of the Complaint.
5 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 6 of 34 PageID: 68
18. America Can! admits that its trademark application for CARS FOR KIDS (App.
Serial No. 85/796,733) lists a date of first use in commerce of at least as early as 1991, but
otherwise denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 18 of the Complaint.
19. America Can! admits that Plaintiff filed a Notice of Opposition (the
“Opposition”) with respect to America Can!’s trademark application and refers to the Opposition
for its date and contents.
20. America Can! admits that it filed an answer to Plaintiff’s Opposition in which it,
among other things, asserted a counterclaim seeking cancellation of the 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS
Registration (Reg. No. 4,130,622) (the “America Can! Cancellation”), and that Plaintiff filed an
answer to the America Can! Cancellation (“Plaintiff’s Answer”) and refers to the America Can!
Cancellation and Plaintiff’s Answer for their respective dates and contents.
21. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 21 of the
Complaint, except admits that it is using its CARS FOR KIDS Mark to promote its own
charitable fundraising services by means of collecting and reselling used automobiles and
watercraft, and that it has further promoted its charitable activities through national advertising
on radio and/or satellite broadcasts including radio stations heard nationally through Sirius XM.
22. America Can! admits that it operates a website at www.americascarsforkids.org
(the “Website”) which features the CARS FOR KIDS designation and designs resembling those
set forth in Paragraph 22 of the Complaint and refers to the Website for its contents.
23. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the alleged results of certain Google searches referenced in Paragraph 23 of the Complaint and
otherwise denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 23 of the Complaint except
admits that it has purchased certain sponsored keyword advertisements.
6 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 7 of 34 PageID: 69
24. As Paragraph 24 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 24 of the Complaint except admits that the visual differences between
CARS FOR KIDS and KARS 4 KIDS would not be apparent to radio listeners and that there is a
likelihood of confusion between America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark and Plaintiff’s alleged
KARS 4 KIDS mark.
25. America Can! admits that its CARS FOR KIDS Mark is likely to be confused
with Plaintiff’s alleged KARS 4 KIDS marks, because the Plaintiff’s alleged KARS 4 KIDS
marks are similar in appearance, sound, pronunciation, meaning, and overall commercial
impression to America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark.
26. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 26 of the Complaint as to whether the parties
offer “identical services” and, accordingly, denies each and every allegation contained in
Paragraph 26 of the Complaint to the extent they characterize purported services offered by
Plaintiff. America Can! admits that, to the extent Plaintiff purports to offer charitable
fundraising services by means of collecting and reselling used automobiles, America Can!’s and
Kars 4 Kids’ concurrent use of their respective marks -- to the extent Plaintiff’s alleged mark is
deemed legitimate -- is likely to cause consumer confusion. America Can! denies each and every
remaining allegation of Paragraph 26 of the Complaint.
27. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 27 of the Complaint and, accordingly, denies
each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 27 of the Complaint, except admits that
America Can!’s charitable services offered in connection with its CARS FOR KIDS Mark
7 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 8 of 34 PageID: 70
appear to travel in the same channels of commerce as the purported services offered in
connection with Plaintiff’s alleged KARS 4 KIDS mark and that consumers are likely to wrongly
associate and/or confuse Plaintiff’s alleged charitable services with those of America Can!
thereby misleading donors into wrongly believing that they are donating to America Can! when,
in fact, they are making donations to Plaintiff. America Can! further states that it is unaware of
any instances in which donors have mistakenly donated to America Can! when, in fact, they
intended to donate to Plaintiff.
28. As Paragraph 28 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 28 of the Complaint.
29. America Can! denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 29 of the Complaint, except admits that, on
information belief, the parties’ respective services are directed at the same (or substantially
similar) stream of commerce and are advertised through similar channels of communication.
30. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 30 of the
Complaint.
31. As Paragraph 31 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 31 of the Complaint.
COUNT I TRADEMARK INFRINTEMENT (15 U.S.C. § 1114)
32. As Paragraph 32 of the Complaint is merely an incorporation of the prior
allegations, no response is required. To the extent a response is required, America Can!
8 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 9 of 34 PageID: 71
incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Complaint as if set
forth fully herein.
33. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 33 of the
Complaint.
34. As Paragraph 34 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! admits that it has used and intends
to continue to use in commerce its CARS FOR KIDS Mark in connection with its charitable
fundraising services by means of collecting and reselling used automobiles and that Plaintiff’s
alleged KARS 4 KIDS mark is confusingly similar to America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark,
and otherwise denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 34 of the Complaint.
35. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 35 of the
Complaint.
36. As Paragraph 36 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 36 of the Complaint.
37. As Paragraph 37 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 37 of the Complaint.
38. As Paragraph 38 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 38 of the Complaint.
9 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 10 of 34 PageID: 72
COUNT II UNFAIR COMPETITION AND FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
39. As Paragraph 39 of the Complaint is merely an incorporation of the prior
allegations, no response is required. To the extent a response is required, America Can!
incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 38 of the Complaint as if set
forth fully herein.
40. As Paragraph 40 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 40 of the Complaint.
41. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 41 of the
Complaint in so far as the alleged “conduct” complained of relates to a claim of alleged unfair
competition and false designation of origin and otherwise denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 41 of the Complaint.
42. As Paragraph 42 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 42 of the Complaint.
43. As Paragraph 43 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 43 of the Complaint.
44. As Paragraph 44 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 44 of the Complaint.
10 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 11 of 34 PageID: 73
COUNT III TRADEMARK DILUTION (N.J.S.A. §§ 56:3-13 et seq.)
45. As Paragraph 45 of the Complaint is merely an incorporation of the prior
allegations, no response is required. To the extent a response is required, America Can!
incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 44 of the Complaint as if set
forth fully herein.
46. As Paragraph 46 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 46 of the Complaint.
47. As Paragraph 47 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 47 of the Complaint.
48. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 48 of the
Complaint.
49. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 49 of the
Complaint in so far as the alleged “conduct” complained of relates to a claim of alleged
trademark dilution.
50. As Paragraph 50 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 50 of the Complaint.
51. As Paragraph 51 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 51 of the Complaint.
11 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 12 of 34 PageID: 74
52. As Paragraph 52 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 52 of the Complaint.
COUNT IV VIOLATION OF NEW JERSEY’S UNFAIR COMPETITION STATUTE (N.J.S.A § 56:4-1)
53. As Paragraph 53 of the Complaint is merely an incorporation of the prior
allegations, no response is required. To the extent a response is required, America Can!
incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 52 of the Complaint as if set
forth fully herein.
54. America Can! denies each and every remaining allegation of Paragraph 54 of the
Complaint, except admits that, to the extent Plaintiff offers charitable fundraising services by
means of collecting and reselling used automobiles, America Can!’s and Kars 4 Kids’ concurrent
use of their respective Marks -- to the extent Plaintiff’s alleged mark is deemed legitimate -- is
likely to cause consumer confusion and mistake and to deceive consumers as to the source or
origin of Plaintiff’s services such that consumers may believe that Plaintiff’s services are
sponsored by, endorsed by, approved by, licensed by, authorized by, or otherwise affiliated or
connected with America Can!.
55. As Paragraph 55 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 55 of the Complaint.
56. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 56 of the
Complaint in so far as the alleged “conduct” complained of relates to a claim of alleged unfair
competition.
12 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 13 of 34 PageID: 75
57. As Paragraph 57 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 57 of the Complaint in so far as the alleged “conduct” complained of
relates to a claim of alleged unfair competition and otherwise denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 57 of the Complaint.
58. As Paragraph 58 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 58 of the Complaint in so far as the alleged “conduct” complained of
relates to a claim of alleged unfair competition and otherwise denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 58 of the Complaint.
COUNT V COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT, UNFAIR COMPETITION AND DILUTION
59. As Paragraph 59 of the Complaint is merely an incorporation of the prior
allegations, no response is required. To the extent a response is required, America Can!
incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 58 of the Complaint as if set
forth fully herein.
60. As Paragraph 60 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 60 of the Complaint except admits that, to the extent Plaintiff offers
charitable fundraising services by means of collecting and reselling used automobiles, Plaintiff’s
use of its alleged KARS 4 KIDS mark is likely to cause consumer confusion, mistake and/or
deceive consumers as to the source, origin, sponsorship, or affiliation of Plaintiff’s services and
constitutes trademark infringement, unfair competition, dilution and misappropriation of
America Can!’s goodwill, and reputation, in violation of the laws of the State of New Jersey. 13 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 14 of 34 PageID: 76
61. America Can! denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 61 of the
Complaint in so far as the alleged “conduct” complained of relates to a claim of alleged common
law trademark infringement, unfair competition and dilution.
62. As Paragraph 62 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 62 of the Complaint.
63. As Paragraph 63 of the Complaint asserts conclusions of law, no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, America Can! denies each and every allegation
contained in Paragraph 63 of the Complaint.
To the extent the Complaint’s Wherefore provisions request relief to which Plaintiff
believes it is entitled, no response is required. To the extent a response is required, America
Can! denies that the Plaintiff is entitled to any relief sought in the Complaint including, without
limitation, the relief requested in the Wherefore provisions.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
First Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, by the applicable statute of
limitations governing its claims and are time-barred.
Second Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, by its own conduct.
Third Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, by the doctrines of waiver, res
judicata, collateral estoppel, claim preclusion and/or issue preclusion.
14 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 15 of 34 PageID: 77
Fourth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, by the doctrine of estoppel.
Fifth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, by the doctrine of unclean
hands.
Sixth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.
Seventh Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, because Plaintiff has no valid
rights in the marks 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS and/or KARS 4 KIDS.
Eighth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, because America Can!’s
trademark rights in its CARS FOR KIDS mark predates any trademark rights of the Plaintiff.
Ninth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff’s claims for relief are barred in whole, or in part, by the doctrine laches.
COUNTERCLAIMS AGAINST PLAINTIFF
Counterclaim Plaintiff America Can! by its attorneys, Haynes and Boone, LLP and Fox
Rothschild LLP, for its counterclaims against Counterclaim Defendant Kars 4 Kids, Inc.
(“Kars”), alleges as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Office,
priority, likelihood of confusion pursuant to 2(d) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d); unfair
competition pursuant to 43(a)(1)(A) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A); trademark
15 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 16 of 34 PageID: 78
dilution pursuant to Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c); and trademark
dilution, infringement and unfair competition under both New Jersey law and common law.
THE PARTIES
2. America Can! is a Texas not-for-profit corporation with offices at 325 W. 12th
Street, Suite 250, Dallas, Texas 75208.
3. Upon information and belief, Kars is a non-profit corporation organized under the
laws of the State of New Jersey with an address at 1805 Swarthmore Avenue, Lakewood, New
Jersey 08701.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. Jurisdiction is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a) and 1338(a) and (b)
insofar as this action involves: (1) claims arising under the laws of the United States, specifically
the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114 et seq.; and (2) is between citizens of different states and the
amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00, exclusive of attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
5. Counterclaim Defendant, Kars, is subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court as
evidenced by, inter alia, its consent to jurisdiction in this Court via its complaint and its
systematic and continuous contacts with the State of New Jersey.
6. Venue is proper in this jurisdiction pursuant to, inter alia, 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
16 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 17 of 34 PageID: 79
FACTS RELEVANT TO THE COUNTERCLAIMS
A. America Can!’s Charitable Activities and America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark
7. America Can! is a charity that has been helping to turn around the lives of
children since 1985.1
8. In the late 1980s, America Can! began to devote significant efforts toward
creating a program aimed at aiding underprivileged youth with educational programs through
funds raised by collecting and reselling used automobiles and watercraft at auction.
9. Beginning in 1989, America Can! took steps to promote its automobile and
watercraft resale program and boost its charitable fundraising activities through use of the
assumed names Cars for Kids and Kars for Kids. These assumed names accurately reflected
America Can!’s program to provide funding for educational programs aimed at underprivileged
children through the sale of used automobiles and watercrafts.
10. Since at least 1989, America Can! has continuously and consistently used its Cars
For Kids Mark (the “CARS FOR KIDS Mark”) in interstate commerce and in connection with its
charitable fund raising services.
11. America Can! has expended significant resources toward extensive marketing and
advertising efforts to promote its CARS FOR KIDS Mark and the underlying automobile and
watercraft donation program including, but not limited to, print and broadcast advertising,
billboards, door hangings, and other publicity methods.
12. As a result, the CARS FOR KIDS Mark and its related marketing slogan “Write
Off The Car, Not The Kid” have received widespread recognition and value in the United States.
1 At the time America Can! was known as Texans Can! and it has, throughout its existence, operated under a number of names incorporating the word “Can”. America Can! has operated under its current name since February 7, 2003.
17 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 18 of 34 PageID: 80
13. Further, America Can! has acquired common law rights in the trademark CARS
FOR KIDS in connection with its charitable activities and has developed exceedingly valuable
goodwill with respect to the CARS FOR KIDS Mark.
14. Although America Can!’s activities were initially concentrated in Texas, where
the charity was founded, since its founding, America Can! has solicited and received donations
in aid of its activities in all 50 states.
15. America Can! uses the funds it receives through donations and through its auction
of automobiles and watercraft to create and support educational programs for at risk youth at the
high school level in order to help them obtain a high school diploma and to give them the tools to
achieve economic independence.
16. To date, America Can!’s programs have served over 50,000 students. As a result,
America Can!’s programs have been the subject national press coverage and recognized by
Independent Charities of America as a “Best in America” charity and greatnonprofits.org as a
top-rated nonprofit for 2014.
B. KARS’ Infringement of America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark
17. In or about August of 2003, America Can! learned of Kars’ use of the phrase
“Kars 4 Kids” in connection with its alleged automobile donation program through an
advertisement that appeared in the Dallas Morning News.
18. Based on the advertisement, it appeared that Kars’ donation program was similar,
if not identical, to that which had been implemented by America Can! for more than a decade.
As a result, it appeared as though America Can! and Kars operated in the same area of
commerce.
18 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 19 of 34 PageID: 81
19. Because Kars’ use of the phrase “Kars 4 Kids” was so similar to America Can!’s
CARS FOR KIDS Mark and because both entities appeared to be operating similar automobile
donation programs aimed at the same channels of commerce, America Can! took steps to advise
Kars of its CARS FOR KIDS Mark and the likelihood that Kars’ use of the similar phrase “Kars
4 Kids” was likely to cause confusion, mistake and deception in the marketplace.
20. Specifically, by letter dated August 7, 2003 (the “Cease and Desist Letter”),
America Can!’s attorneys advised Kars in writing of America Can!’s rights in its CARS FOR
KIDS Mark and informed Kars that, inter alia: (1) America Can! had been exclusively utilizing
the CARS FOR KIDS Mark since 1992;2 and (2) Kars’ use and adoption of the confusingly
similar “Kars 4 Kids” phrase infringed on America Can!’s Mark and was likely to cause
confusion, mistake, and deception with respect to America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark.
21. Although Kars appears to have ceased its use of the “Kars 4 Kids” phrase in
America Can!’s home state of Texas following Kars’ receipt of the Cease and Desist Letter, Kars
has, upon information and belief, continued to use the phrase “Kars 4 Kids” in connection with
its commercial activities outside the State of Texas.
22. On information and belief, with full knowledge of America Can!’s CARS FOR
KIDS Mark, on February 24, 2011, Kars filed U.S. Trademark Application Ser. No. 85/250,329
for the Mark 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS (the “Kars Application”) with the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) covering “charitable fund raising services by means of
collecting and reselling used automobiles,” in International Class 36. That application ultimately
issued as Reg. No. 4,130,622 on April 24, 2012.
2 The Cease and Desist Letter asserted that America Can! (then known as Texans CAN!) had been exclusively utilizing the “Cars for Kids” name in Texas since 1992. America Can!’s trademark application filed in December of 2012 similarly misstated its first use of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark as 1991. In fact, America Can! has actually been utilizing the CARS FOR KIDS Mark since at least 1989.
19 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 20 of 34 PageID: 82
23. In the Kars Application, Kars asserted that it had been using the phrase “1-877-
KARS-4-KIDS” in commerce since October 08, 2003 -- two months after Kars’ receipt of the
2003 Letter from America Can!’s attorneys.
24. The Kars Application was executed on behalf of Kars by Asher Moskovits
(“Moskovits”), Kars’ Director of Business Development. At the time Moskovits executed the
Kars Application, Kars was well-aware of America Can!’s pre-existing rights in the CARS FOR
KIDS Mark and the fact that America Can! had been using the CARS FOR KIDS Mark since at
least 1992 by virtue of, inter alia, Kars’ receipt of America Can!’s Cease and Desist Letter.
Kars’ was further aware that its use of the phrase “Kars 4 Kids” would likely cause confusion,
cause mistake, or deceive consumers and/or potential donors in the marketplace.
25. Despite its knowledge of America Can!’s preexisting rights in its CARS FOR
KIDS Mark, and its knowledge that a “Kars 4 Kids” trademark would likely cause confusion, or
cause mistake, or deceive consumers and/or potential donors, Kars declared in the Kars
Application that, inter alia, to best of its knowledge and belief, no other person or corporation
had the right to use any mark that had such a near resemblance to Kars 4 Kids as to be likely,
when used on or in connection with such other person’s services, to cause confusion, or to cause
mistake, or to deceive.
26. Kars’ declaration in the Kars Application not only ignored the contents of
America Can!’s Cease and Desist Letter with respect to America Can!’s prior use of a CARS
FOR KIDS Mark, it also ignored the fact that Kars had been advised by the USPTO as early as
May 2009 that a requested mark of “Kars 4 Kids” was confusingly similar to terms previously
20 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 21 of 34 PageID: 83
used by a third party for the very same services of car donations for children’s charities that Kars
was seeking to promote in connection with its own activities.3
27. Accordingly, Kars declaration in support of the Kars Application was knowingly
and materially false and misleading and was made with the intent to deceive the USPTO.
28. On December 6, 2012, America Can! filed a trademark application (the “America
Can! Application”) for the mark CARS FOR KIDS (the “CARS FOR KIDS Mark”) with the
USPTO for use in “arranging of automobile and watercraft auction sales and carrying out
automobile and watercraft auction sales; organizing and conducting charity auctions for
charitable fundraising purposes,” in International Class 35, and “charitable fundraising by means
of collecting and reselling used automobiles and watercraft,” in International Class 36 as
evidenced by the publication of such designations in the Official Gazette on December 3, 2013.
29. On or about May 30, 2014, Kars filed an opposition (the “Opposition”) to the
America Can! Application contending, inter alia, that it had priority over America Can!’s
Application because Kars had allegedly used its 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS and KARS 4 KIDS
trademarks in commerce prior to America Can!’s use of its CARS FOR KIDS Mark in
commerce.
30. On or about August 7, 2014, America Can! filed an answer to Kars’ Opposition in
which it asserted, inter alia, a counterclaim seeking cancellation of the 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS
Registration (Reg. No. 4,130,622) (the “America Can! Cancellation”) based upon, among other
things, the fraudulent statement(s) contained in the Kars Application.
31. On or about September 8, 2014, Kars filed an answer to the America Can!
Cancellation (“Kars’ Answer”).
3 The USPTO advised Kars of this issue in a May 13, 2009 Official Action (the “Official Action”) sent to Kars in response to its attempt to register the mark “Kars 4 Kids” (U.S. App. Serial No. 77/673,523).
21 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 22 of 34 PageID: 84
FIRST COUNTERCLAIM CANCELLATION OF THE “1-877-KARS-4-KIDS” TRADEMARK, REG. NO. 4,130,622 (15 U.S.C. § 1119)
32. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 31 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
33. This Court has the authority to order the cancellation of the 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS
Registration pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1119, which allows the Court in “any action involving a
registered mark” to “order the cancellation of registrations, in whole or in part, and otherwise
rectify the register with respect to the registration of any party to the action.”
34. According to the records of the USPTO, Kars filed its U.S. Trademark Reg. No.
4,130,622 for 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS on February 24, 2011, and alleged dates of first use in
commerce and anywhere of October 08, 2003.
35. America Can! has been using its CARS FOR KIDS Trademark in commerce since
at least as early 1989, well prior to any date of first use Kars 4 Kids, Inc. can show for either its
alleged KARS 4 KIDS or 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS marks.
36. The CARS FOR KIDS Mark and the alleged KARS 4 KIDS marks are legally
identical.
37. As the alleged 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS mark fully incorporates the legally identical
CARS FOR KIDS Mark and the 1-877 number string represents a merely generic telephone
prefix, the alleged 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS mark and the CARS FOR KIDS Mark are confusingly
similar.
38. As America Can! possesses prior rights to the CARS FOR KIDS Mark, Reg. No.
4,130,622 for the 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS, Counterclaim-Plaintiff requests the cancellation of the
foregoing Registration.
22 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 23 of 34 PageID: 85
SECOND COUNTERCLAIM DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF FRAUD ON THE USPTO AND CANCELLATION OF THE “1-877-KARS-4-KIDS” TRADEMARK, REG. NO. 4,130,622 (15 U.S.C. § 1119)
39. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 38 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
40. On February 24, 2011, Kars filed the Kars Application for its U.S. Trademark
Reg. No. 4,130,622 for 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS (the “KARS 4 KIDS mark”).
41. In the Kars Application, Kars’ Director of Business Development, Asher
Moskovits (“Moskovits”), declared, under oath, among other things, that to the best of his
knowledge and belief no other person or corporation had the right to use any mark that had such
a near resemblance to Kars’ requested KARS 4 KIDS mark as to be likely, when used on or in
connection with such other person’s services, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
deceive.
42. At the time Kars filed the Kars Application, including the sworn declaration of
Moskovits, Kars was aware that America Can! was already using its CARS FOR KIDS Mark by
virtue of, inter alia, America Can!’s Cease and Desist Letter.
43. At the time Kars filed the Kars Application, including the sworn declaration of
Moskovits, Kars was also aware, by virtue of, inter alia, the USPTO’s May 13, 2009
OfficeAction, that a “Kars 4 Kids” mark would be the same or confusingly similar to another
CARS FOR KIDS-formative offered the very same services of car donations for children’s
charities purportedly offered by Kars.
44. At the time Kars filed the Kars Application, including the sworn declaration of
Moskovits, Kars was aware that America Can! had legal rights in its CARS FOR KIDS Mark
that were superior to the rights Kars claimed in its alleged KARS 4 KIDS mark.
23 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 24 of 34 PageID: 86
45. Kars’ failure to disclose these facts and Moskovits’ declaration, on behalf of Kars,
that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, no other person or corporation had the right to use
any mark that had such a near resemblance to Kars’ requested KARS 4 KIDS mark as to be
likely, when used on or in connection with such other person’s services, to cause confusion, or to
cause mistake, or to deceive, was knowingly and materially false and misleading and was made
with the intent to deceive the USPTO in order to procure a registration to which Kars was not
entitled.
46. America Can! has been and will continue to be damaged by maintenance of U.S.
Trademark Reg. No. 4,130,622 for the alleged KARS 4 KIDS mark for at least the reason that
Kars is asserting such registration against America Can!
47. In view of the above allegations, Kars was not entitled to registration of the 1-
877-KARS-4-KIDS mark because Kars committed fraud in procuring Registration No.
4,130,622. Accordingly, Registration No. 4,130,622 should be cancelled.
24 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 25 of 34 PageID: 87
THIRD COUNTERCLAIM DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NO PROTECTABLE TRADEMARK
48. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 47 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
49. America Can! is the owner of U.S. App. Serial No. 85/796,733 for CARS FOR
KIDS -- i.e., the CARS FOR KIDS Mark -- for use in connection with “arranging of automobile
and watercraft auction sales and carrying out automobile and watercraft auction sales;
Organizing and conducting charity auctions for charitable fundraising purposes,” in International
Class 35, and “charitable fundraising by means of collecting and reselling used automobile and
watercraft,” in International Class 36.
50. Since at least as early as 1989, America Can! has continuously used the CARS
FOR KIDS Mark in interstate commerce and throughout the United States.
51. Kars filed its application for the requested 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS mark on
February 24, 2011, alleging a date of first use in commerce and anywhere of October 8, 2003, a
date well subsequent to the establishment of America Can!’s rights in its CARS FOR KIDS
Mark.
52. Kars alleges in its Complaint that it has used the requested KARS 4 KIDS mark
since 1998, a date well subsequent to the establishment of America Can!’s rights in its CARS
FOR KIDS Mark.
53. There is no issue as to priority of use between America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS
Mark and the alleged KARS 4 KIDS marks.
54. During Kars’ opposition of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark, Plaintiff admitted that
the similarity between America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark and Plaintiff’s alleged Marks 1-
25 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 26 of 34 PageID: 88
877-KARS-4-KIDS and KARS 4 KIDS are likely to cause confusion between America Can!’s
Mark and Kars’ alleged marks within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the Lanham Act.
55. Plaintiff is thus estopped from arguing that there is no likelihood of confusion
between America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark and Kars’ alleged KARS 4 KIDS marks
within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the Lanham Act.
56. Since America Can! has priority of use of the Marks at issue and Kars has
admitted that its alleged KARS 4 KIDS marks are likely to cause confusion with America Can!’s
CARS FOR KIDS Mark, Kars is not entitled to claim superior rights to the alleged KARS 4
KIDS marks.
57. If Kars is permitted to retain its registration for the alleged 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS
mark, a cloud will be placed on America Can!’s title in, and to, its CARS FOR KIDS Mark, onto
its ability to obtain registration, and on its right to enjoy the free and exclusive use thereof, in
connection with the provision of its services -- all to the harm and detriment of America Can!.
58. Additionally, America Can! has been, and will continue to be, damaged by the
existence and issuance of Kars’ U.S. Trademark Registration No. 4,130,622 for the alleged mark
1-877-KARS-4-KIDS.
59. A judicial declaration of Kars’ lack of protectable trademark rights is necessary
and appropriate to resolve this controversy.
FOURTH COUNTERCLAIM DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NO TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
60. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 59 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
26 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 27 of 34 PageID: 89
61. Based upon its prior and continuous use of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark, America
Can! does not infringe and has not infringed upon any trademark rights that Kars may or alleges
to possess.
62. A judicial declaration of non-infringement of Kars’ asserted trademark rights is
necessary and appropriate to resolve this controversy.
FIFTH COUNTERCLAIM UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER FEDERAL LAW (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
63. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 62 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
64. Kars’ conduct constitutes unfair competition and false designation of origin under
Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Kars’ use of the 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS
and KARS 4 KIDS designations is likely to cause confusion, or mistake, or to deceive as to the
affiliation, connection, association, origin, sponsorship, or approval of Kars’ services.
65. Kars’ conduct is, and has been, willful and deliberate.
66. Kars’ conduct has caused, and is causing, immediate and irreparable harm to
America Can!. America Can! has no adequate remedy at law sufficient to fully remedy Kars’
conduct and unless Kars is permanently enjoined, Kars’ conduct will continue to cause America
Can! irreparable harm.
67. America Can! has been and will continue to be damaged by Kars’ conduct in an
amount to be determined at trial.
SIXTH COUNTERCLAIM TRADEMARK DILUTION UNDER FEDERAL LAW (15 U.S.C. § 1125(c))
68. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 67 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
27 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 28 of 34 PageID: 90
69. America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark is inherently distinctive. By virtue of
America Can!’s extensive nationwide advertising and promotion of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark
for more than two decades, the Mark has acquired distinctiveness in the marketplace and has
become famous as a designation of source of America Can!’s services such that the CARS FOR
KIDS Mark is uniquely associated with America Can! and widely recognized by the general
consuming public.
70. Kars’ use of its alleged KARS 4 KIDS marks for its competitive fundraising
services by means of collecting and reselling used automobiles, which began after America
Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark became famous, has diluted, or is likely to dilute, and unless
restrained will continue to dilute, the distinctive quality of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark by
destroying the exclusive association between the CARS FOR KIDS Mark and America Can!’s
services, or otherwise lessening the capacity of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark to exclusively
identify America Can! and its services.
71. Kars’ conduct constitutes trademark dilution under Section 43(c) of the Lanham
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
72. Kars’ conduct is, and has been, willful and deliberate.
73. Kars’ conduct has caused, and is causing, immediate and irreparable harm to
America Can!. America Can! has no adequate remedy at law sufficient to fully remedy Kars’
conduct and unless Kars is permanently enjoined, Kars’ conduct will continue to cause America
Can! irreparable harm.
74. America Can! has been, and will continue to be, damaged by Kars’ conduct in an
amount to be determined at trial.
28 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 29 of 34 PageID: 91
SEVENTH COUNTERCLAIM TRADEMARK DILUTION UNDER NEW JERSEY LAW (N.J.S.A. § 56:3-13 et seq.)
75. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth Paragraphs 1 through
74 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
76. America Can!’s CARS FOR KIDS Mark is inherently distinctive. By virtue of
America Can!’s extensive advertising and promotion of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark for more
than two decades, including advertising and promotion in New Jersey, the Mark has acquired
distinctiveness in the marketplace and has become famous as a designation of source of America
Can!’s services such that the CARS FOR KIDS Mark is uniquely associated with America Can!
and widely recognized by the general consuming public nationally and in New Jersey.
77. Kars’ use of its KARS 4 KIDS Marks for its competitive fundraising services by
means of collecting and reselling used automobiles, which began after America Can!’s CARS
FOR KIDS Mark became famous in New Jersey, has diluted, or is likely to dilute, and unless
restrained will continue to dilute, the distinctive quality of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark by
destroying the exclusive association between the CARS FOR KIDS Mark and America Can!’s
services, or otherwise lessening the capacity of the CARS FOR KIDS Mark to exclusively
identify America Can! and its services.
78. Kars’ conduct constitutes trademark dilution under N.J.S.A. § 56:3-13.
79. Kars’ conduct is, and has been, willful and deliberate.
80. Kars’ conduct has caused, and is causing, immediate and irreparable harm to
America Can!. America Can! has no adequate remedy at law sufficient to fully remedy Kars’
conduct, and unless Kars is permanently enjoined Kars’ conduct will continue to cause America
Can! irreparable harm.
29 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 30 of 34 PageID: 92
81. America Can! has been and will continue to be damaged by Kars’ conduct in an
amount to be determined at trial.
EIGHTH COUNTERCLAIM UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER NEW JERSEY LAW (N.J.S.A. § 56:4-1)
82. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 81 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
83. America Can! is the exclusive owner of the valid CARS FOR KIDS Mark in
connection with arranging of automobile and watercraft auction sales and carrying out
automobile and watercraft auction sales; organizing and conducting charity auctions for
charitable fundraising purposes, and charitable fundraising by means of collecting and reselling
used automobile and watercraft.
84. Kars’ use of Kars 4 Kids as a trademark, in connection with its charitable
fundraising services, without the authorization or consent of America Can!, is likely to cause
confusion and mistake, and to deceive consumers as to the source or origin of Kars’ services,
such that consumers may believe that Kars and/or Kars’ services are sponsored by, endorsed by,
approved by, licensed by, authorized by, or affiliated or connected with CARS FOR KIDS.
85. Kars’ acts of unfair competition, misappropriation, passing off, underprivileged
imitation and infringement are in violation of the New Jersey Fair Trade Act, N.J.S.A. § 56:4-1.
86. Kars’ conduct is, and has been, willful and deliberate.
87. Kars’ conduct causes immediate irreparable harm to America Can!. America
Can! has no adequate remedy at law sufficient to fully remedy Kars’ conduct and unless Kars is
enjoined, Kars’ conduct will continue to cause America Can! irreparable harm.
88. America Can! has been and will continue to be harmed by Kars’ conduct in an
amount subject to proof.
30 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 31 of 34 PageID: 93
SEVENTH COUNTERCLAIM COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR COMPETITION
89. America Can! repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 88 of these Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
90. America Can! is the exclusive owner of the valid CARS FOR KIDS Mark in
connection with arranging of automobile and watercraft auction sales and carrying out
automobile and watercraft auction sales; organizing and conducting charity auctions for
charitable fundraising purposes, and charitable fundraising by means of collecting and reselling
used automobile and watercraft.
91. Kars’ use of KARS 4 KIDS as a trademark, in connection with its charitable
fundraising services, without the authorization or consent of America Can!, is likely to cause
confusion and mistake, and to deceive consumers as to the source, origin, sponsorship, or
affiliation of Kars’ services and constitutes trademark infringement, unfair competition, dilution
and misappropriation of CARS FOR KIDS goodwill and reputation in violation of the laws of
the State of New Jersey.
92. Kars’ conduct is, and has been, willful and deliberate.
93. Kars’ conduct causes immediate irreparable harm to America Can!. America
Can! has no adequate remedy at law sufficient to fully remedy Kars’ conduct and, unless Kars is
enjoined, Kars’ conduct will continue to cause America Can! irreparable harm.
94. America Can! has been, and will continue to be, harmed by Kars’ infringement of
the CARS FOR KIDS Mark in an amount subject to proof.
31 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 32 of 34 PageID: 94
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, America Can! demands judgment against Kars 4 Kids, as follows:
(A) that the Complaint be dismissed and America Can! be granted registration
of its application;
(B) that U.S. Trademark Registration No. 4,130,622 for the mark 1-877-
KARS-4-KIDS be cancelled;
(C) that Kars 4 Kids and its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees,
licensees, and all other persons in privity or acting in concert with them be preliminarily and
permanently enjoined and restrained from using the KARS 4 KIDS and 1-877-KARS-4-KIDS
designations or any term, mark, logo, trade name, Internet domain name, or any other source
identifier or symbol of origin that is confusingly similar to the CARS FOR KIDS Mark or likely
to dilute its distinctive quality;
(D) that Kars 4 Kids provide an accounting of its profits, and any damages
sustained by America Can!, from the foregoing acts of trademark infringement, trademark
dilution, and unfair competition;
(E) that Kars 4 Kids pay an award of profits in accordance with such
accounting and award a judgment for three times America Can!’s actual damages arising from
Kars 4 Kids’ unlawful conduct pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117;
(F) that Kars 4 Kids’ conduct was willful and that this case is exceptional
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117;
(G) Order that America Can! recover its costs, including its reasonable
attorney’s fees and disbursements, in this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117;
32 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 33 of 34 PageID: 95
(H) Direct the USPTO to dismiss the Kars 4 Kids Opposition pursuant to 15
U.S.C. § 1019;
(I) Grant any and all relief provided pursuant to N.J.S.A. § 56:4-2, including
treble damages; and
(J) Order such other and further relief that the Court deems just and proper.
Dated: February 5, 2015 Respectfully submitted,
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
By: /s/ Karen A. Confoy Karen A. Confoy Christopher R. Kinkade Princeton Pike Corporate Center 997 Lenox Drive, Building 3 Lawrenceville, NJ 08648-2311 Telephone: (609) 896-3600 Facsimile: (609) 896-1469 Email: [email protected] [email protected]
Jonathan D. Pressment (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP 30 Rockefeller Plaza, 26th Floor New York, NY 10112 Telephone: (212) 659-7300 Facsimile: (212) 918-8989 Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Defendant America Can!
33 Case 3:14-cv-07770-PGS-LHG Document 16 Filed 02/05/15 Page 34 of 34 PageID: 96
LOCAL RULE 11.2 AND 40.1 CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 11.2 and 40.1, the undersigned attorney for
Defendant America Can!, hereby certifies to the best of her knowledge and belief that the matter
in controversy is not the subject of any other action pending in any court or of any pending
arbitration or administrative proceeding except: Joy For Our Youth, Inc. v. America Can!,
Opposition No. 91216638, In The United States Patent and Trademark Office Before The
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Dated: February 5, 2015 By: /s/ Karen A. Confoy Karen A. Confoy [email protected]
34