1

Gabriel G. Green (Bar No. 222445)

Jmee J/Yoo (Bar No. 292659)

ARCHER NORRIS

Los Angeles, CA 90071-1540

Telephone: 213.437.4000

Facsimile:

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SCALED

eereen^archernorris.com
iyoo(5)archernorris.com

nnn

333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 1700

213.437.4011

KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC.

UNITED STATER DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11

JWNC.H

KING TACO RESTAURA

California corporation,

12

Plaintiff,
v.

15

16

VU,-02242
COMPLAINT FOR:

(1) FEDERAL TRADEMARK

13

14

EASTERN DIVISION

INFRINGEMENT;

GILBERTO TABARES, individually

(2) FEDERAL UNFAIR

entity ofunknown form; and DOES 1-

(3) CALIFORNIA COMMON LAW

and doing business as THE KING

TACO; THE KING TACO, a business
10, inclusive,

COMPETITION AND FALSE

ADVERTISING;
TRADEMARK

17

Defendants.

INFRINGEMENT;

(4) CALIFORNIA COMMON LAW

18

UNFAIR COMPETITION; and

19

(5) CALIFORNIA STATUTORY

20

UNFAIR COMPETITION

21
22

Plaintiff KING TACO

23
24

RESTAURANT, INC. ("Plaintiff or"King Taco"),

complains against defendants GILBERTO TABARES, individually and doing

business as THE KING TACO, and Tl TE KING TACO (collectively,

25

"Defendants") as follows:
26

P\RTIES

Uj28

1.

Plaintiff King Taco Restaurant, Inc. is acorporation duly organized

COMPLAINT

K0123019/1929756-2

mm.

and incorporated under the laws of Caliifornia, with its principal place of business at

6055 East Washington Blvd. #750, Con merce, California 90040.

2.
Plaintiff is informed and be lieves, and thereon alleges, that defendant
GILBERTO TABARES ("Defendant Tabares") is an individual that has aresidence
in or around San Bernardino, California and is the owner and/or operator of

defendant The King Taco, and is doing business under the name "The King Taco."

3
4

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that defendant

THE KING TACO ("Defendant TKT") is a business entity of unknown form and/or

origin that operates restaurant businesses at 900 N. Mt. Vernon Ave., San

10
11

th
Bernardino, CA 92411 and 1042 W. 5 St., San Bernardino, CA 92411.

4.

Plaintiff is ignorant of the rue names and capacities of the defendants

12

sued herein as DOES 1 through 10 and: therefore, sues these defendants by such

13

fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend tlis Complaint to allege the true names and

14

capacities ofthese defendants when ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes,

15
16

and thereon alleges, that each ofthe fictitiously named defendants DOES 1through
10, inclusive, caused and participated i:i each ofthe acts and omissions of each of

18

the named defendants herein alleged, aid in doing so, acted as the agent, employee
and/or co-conspirator of said defendants, and acted within the scope and in

19

furtherance of said agency, employment, or conspiracy.

17

20

5.

Upon information and belief, each defendant named herein is the

21

agent, principal, joint venturer, and/or so-conspirator ofthe other defendants and

22

each is jointly and severally liable for he acts and omissions of all ofthe other

23

named defendants.

24

6.

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that there exists

25

and, at all times herein mentioned, existed aunity of interest and ownership

26

between Defendant Tabares and Defendant TKT such that any individuality and

27

28

separateness between the Defendants lias ceased, and that Defendant TKT is the
alter ego ofDefendant Tabares. Plaintiff alleges, on information and belief, that
COMPLAINT
K0123019/1929756-2

Defendant TKT is and, at all times herein mentioned, was a mere shell,

instrumentality, and conduit through which Defendant Tabares carried on his

business in the entity's name prior to formation, exercising complete control and

dominance of such business to such an extent that any individuality or separateness

ofDefendant TKT and Defendant Tabs res does not and, at all times mentioned

here, did not exist. Moreover, Plaintiff alleges, on information and belief, that

8
9

Defendant Tabares used assets ofDefendant TKT for his personal uses, caused
assets ofDefendant TKT to be transfer red to him without adequate consideration,
and/or withdrew funds from Defendant TKT's bank accounts for his personal use.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

10

7.

11

Jurisdiction in this Court is proper as this Complaint poses federal

13

questions arising under particular federal statutes, including the Federal Trademark
Act (the "Lanham Act") as amended ir. 15 U.S.C. 1051 etseq., and the Unfair

14

Competition Act under 15 U.S.C. 1125 et seq. This Court has subject matter

15

jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C 1331 and 1338, and 15 U.S.C.

16

1121.

12

17

8.

To the extent this Comprint claims for relief under California state

19

law and common law, those claims an specifically authorized to be brought in this
Court under the supplemental jurisdiction provision of28 U.S.C 1367 and under

20

28 U.S.C. 1338.

18

23

9.
The Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants as Defendant
Tabares is a resident ofCalifornia, Defendants conduct business in California, and
Defendants are intentionally infringing upon trademarks registered by Plaintiff, a

24

California corporation.

21

22

25

10.

Venue is proper in the St ate ofCalifornia and this district pursuant to

26

28 U.S.C. 1391(b) because Defendant Tabares is aresident of San Bernardino and

27

regularly conducts business at 900 N. Mt. Vernon Ave., San Bernardino, CA 92411

28

and 1042 W. 5th St., San Bernardino, CA 92411.

K.0123019/1929756-2

COMPLAINT

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiffs Kins; Taco Trademarks

11.

Founded in 1974, and start in;g from

a simple food truck, King Taco has

grown to become a well-known and highly regarded restaurant chain and distributor
of authentic Mexican foods. While Kin g Taco's restaurants are located in

California, King Taco's business continues to expand and is focused on adding

restaurants to other states nationwide

Taco" and "King Taco Restaurant, Inc. trade and service marks and because of

King Taco's numerous restaurants and expansive advertising, King Taco's

As

a result of King Taco's use of its "King

10

restaurants and food services are well known and its trade and service marks are

11

widely recognized by individuals acros^ the country, especially to individuals in the

12

Mexican restaurant business.

13

14

12.

As part of King Taco's expansion efforts, Plaintiff created and owns a

website at URL www.kingtaco.com (" King Taco Website") to promote and

16

advertise King Taco's restaurants and Vpod services. Plaintiff prominentlydisplays

its trademarks on the King Taco Website , which is accessible to a worldwide

17

public. The King Taco Website clearlj denotes Plaintiffs ownership of the King

18

Taco Trademarks, which are identified

15

19

13.

below.

On May 12, 2003, King Taco filed an application for registration of

20

the word mark "King Taco" with the linked States Patent and Trademark Office

21

("USPTO"). On May 4, 2004, the USPTO registered Plaintiffs "King Taco" word

23

mark on the Principal Register with re istration number, 2,838,200, for restaurant,
take-out restaurant services in Class (K3 . A true and correct copy of the registration

24

is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit A. Said registration has become

25

incontestable under 15 U.S.C. 1065

26

filed the required affidavit with the US|PTO.

22

27
28

14.

jind 15 U.S.C. 1115(b), as King Taco has

To further identify its "Kinig Taco" brand, King Taco uses a trademark

that consists of a drawing of a stylized form of a man wearing a crown in

K0123019/1929756-2

COMPLAINT

connection with its popular restaurants and Mexican food products. On June 15,

2004, the USPTO registered Plaintiffs King Taco stylized design mark on the

Principal Register with registration number, 2,853,050, for restaurant, take-out

restaurant services in Class 043. A true:

attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 3. Said registration has become

incontestable under 15 U.S.C. 1065

filed the required affidavit with the UStTO.

15.

In 2004, King Taco also

and correct copy of the registration is

15 U.S.C. 1115(b), as King Taco has

filed

an application for registration of the

stylized word mark "King Taco Restaurants , Inc." with the USPTO. On May 4,

10

2004, the USPTO registered King Taco 's "King Taco Restaurants, Inc." stylized

11

word mark on the Principal Register with registration number, 2,838,199, for

12

restaurant, take-out restaurant services in Class 043. A true and correct copy of the

13

registration is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit C. Said registration has

14

become incontestable under 15 U.S.C.

15

Taco has filed the required affidavit

16

16.

1065 and 15 U.S.C. 1115(b), as King

with the USPTO.

King Taco has continuou sly used its "King Taco" word mark

17

(Registration No. 2,838,200), "King Taco" stylized design mark (Registration No.

18

2,853,050), and "King Taco Restauran ;s, Inc." stylized word mark (Registration

19

No. 2,838,199) (collectively, "King

20

ish said products from similar products

identify its restaurant services to distin ?uish

21

offered by other companies, by, and w thout limitation, prominently displaying said

22

ing of food sold in its restaurants

marks on its restaurants and the packaj;in

23

on advertising and promotional

24

and advertising its King Taco Tradeim rks throughout NASCAR and other motor

25

sports visible across the entire country

Taco

materials

Trademarks") in connection with and to

as well as

including, but not limited to, marketing

Each of the King Taco Trademarks is valid, subsisting, uncancelled,

26

17.

27

and unrevoked.

28
K0123019/1929756-2

COMPLAINT

18.

King Taco takes great effdrt to protect the King Taco Trademarks. It

has obtained permanent injunctions precluding infringing use of the King Taco

Trademarks from the United States District Court for the Central District of

California (Case No. SACV 12-00933- CJC(ANx)); the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of New York (Cf ase No. 1l-CV-5428 (SLT) (JO)); the

United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Case No. 1:12-CV-

10812-JLT); and the Western District c fTexas (Case No. EP-12-CV-00204-DCG).

King Taco has also secured a judgment against a prior infringer from the United

States District Court for the District of Nevada (Case No. 2:08-cv-00281-LRH-

10

PAL).
DEFEND ANTS' IF FRINGING CONDUCT

11

19.

12

King Taco is informed an<^ believes, and thereon alleges, that

13

Defendants own and/or operate two Mexican food restaurants under the infringing

14

name "The King Taco" at or near 900 I. Mt. Vernon Ave., San Bernardino, CA

15

9241 land 1042 W. 5th St., San Bernardino, CA 92411. King Taco is further

16

informed and believes, and thereon alleges,, that Defendants use the infringing name

17

"The King Taco" to sell, offer for sale, promote, and advertise take-out Mexican

18

food.

19

20.

Defendants depict their iinfringing "The King Taco" name on placards

20

and other marketing materials that the)' prominently display around their restaurant

21

and serving locations.

22

21.

Plaintiff never authorized licensed, nor granted permission to the

23

Defendants to use the King Taco Trademarks to promote their infringing business.

24

Defendants' use of the King Taco Trademarks is likely to cause confusion and

25

mistake among consumers and to deceive consumers as to the source, quality, and

26

nature of Defendants' goods and

27

28

22.

services.

Plaintiff alleges on iinfornjiation and belief that Defendants knew of

Plaintiffs brand prior to opening their businesses but nevertheless consciously

K0123019/1929756-2

COMPLAINT

decided to adopt the infringing name "The King Taco" in conscious disregard of

Plaintiffs rights to the King Taco Trademarks.

23.

On October 21, 2014, King Taco's counsel sent a letter to Defendants

advising them of their infringing conduct and demanding that they cease further

infringing use of the confusingly similar "The King Taco" mark. Defendants did

not cease such infringing conduct. Instead, in blatant disregard of King Taco's

rights, Defendants refused to cease thei: infringing conduct and continue to use and

promote their business with the confusingly similar "The King Taco" mark to this

day.

10

FIRST CLA M FOR RELIEF

11

Federal Trademark Infringement

12
13
14

24.

King Taco incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set

forth above in paragraphs 1 through 23. inclusive, as though fully stated herein.

25.

King Taco is the legal oWner of the King Taco Trademarks, has not

15

abandoned any of the King Taco Trademarks since their first use, and all of the

16

King Taco Trademarks have been, ind continue to be, in continuous use in

17

interstate and intrastate commerce.

18

26.

Defendants' unauthorized use of the King Taco Trademarks, as

19

explained above, is likely to cause confusion, mistake, and/or deception among

20

and/or nature of Defendants' goods and

21

services. Defendants' use of the Kiiig Taco Trademarks also likely creates the

22

misconception among consumers that King Taco somehow ratifies or authorizes the

23

Defendants' infringing use of the King Taco Trademarks and/or that King Taco is

24

affiliated in some manner with the Defendants' business, when such is not the case.

25

27.

King Taco never gave Dsfendants permission to use the King Taco

26

Trademarks and King Taco, as owner of the King Taco Trademarks, objects to

27

Defendants' past, and continued, infringing use of the King Taco Trademarks.

28

28.
K0123019/1929756-2

Because Defendants' continued use of the King Taco Trademarks

7

COMPLAINT

prevents King Taco from exercising exclusive control over its intellectual property

rights and because Defendants'

likely to continue to cause confusion mistake, and/or deception as to the source,

affiliation, or sponsorship of the gijoods and services that Defendants advertise,

promote, and/or sell through their infringing use of the King Taco Trademarks,

King Taco lacks an adequate remedy al law. Unless a temporary restraining order,

preliminary injunction, and permanent injunction is issued enjoining Defendants

from any continuing or future infringi g use of the King Taco Trademarks, King

Taco will continue to sustain irreparablfe damage. Indeed, Defendants have already

10

proven themselves to be willful infrin gers who have complete disregard of the

11

intellectual property rights of King

12

Taco is entitled to an order enjoining Defendants, and each of them, from using the

13

King Taco Trademarks to advertise, market, and/or sell Defendants' goods or

14

services.

15

29.

use of the King Taco Trademarks is

continued

Taco .

Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1116(a), King

As a direct and proximat^ cause of Defendants' infringing conduct,

16

King Taco has been damaged and wi 11 continue to be damaged. Pursuant to 15

17

U.S.C. 1117(a), King Taco is entitled to an order requiring Defendants to account

18

to King Taco for any and all profits

19

from their unauthorized and infringi

511l.g use of the King Taco Trademarks, as

20

detailed herein, and to an order awardjng all damages sustained by King Taco by

21

reason ofDefendants' infringing conduct

22

30.

Defendants' infringing

arid

other ill-gotten gains Defendants derived

conduct was intentional and intended to cause

deceive ,

in conscious disregard of King Taco's

23

confusion, to cause mistake, and to

24

rights.

25

enhanced profits from Defendants pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(b).

26

27

King Taco, therefore, is

31.

entitled

Defendants' intentional

acts

to an award of treble damages and/or

make this an exceptional case under 15

U.S.C. 1117(a) and King Taco is entitled to an award of attorneys' fees and costs.

28
K0123019/1929756-2

COMPLAINT

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Federal Unfair Compe tition and False Advertising

3
4

32.

King Taco incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set

forth above in paragraphs 1 through 31, inclusive, as though fully stated herein,
33.

King Taco is the legal owner of the King Taco Trademarks. King

Taco has not abandoned any of the Kin Taco Trademarks since their first use, and

all of the King Taco Trademarks have

Despite knowledge of King Taco's ownership interests in the King Taco

Trademarks, Defendants, and each of thlem have made, and continue to make, use

been ,

and continue to be, in continuous use.

10

in interstate commerce of the King Tac(b Trademarks and/or confusingly similar

11

derivations thereof without King Taco's permission.

12

34.

Defendants' unauthorized

use of the King Taco Trademarks creates a

and King Taco.

Defendants' unauthorized

13

false association between Defendants

14

use of the King Taco Trademarks als^ tends to cause confusion, mistake, and/or

15

deception among consumers as to the source, quality, and nature of Defendants'

16

goods and services.

17

35.

Defendants, and each of ihem, have engaged in fraudulent business

18

practices, false advertising, and unfair competition by using the King Taco

19

Trademarks, associated goodwill, and cither intangible rights of King Taco without

20

permission in an attempt to pass off Defendants' goods as coming from, being

21

sponsored by, and/or affiliated with Kinj:g Taco, when such is not the case.

22

36.

Defendants' use of the Kin g

Taco Trademarks, goodwill, and other

23

intangible rights of King Taco is in direct violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) et seq.,

24

and represents false advertising and

25

to all remedies available under the law.

26

37.

false

designation of source entitling King Taco

As a proximate result of the foregoing conduct, King Taco is entitled

each of them, in an amount according to

27

to damages against all Defendants

28

proofat trial, to a temporary, preliminaify , and permanent injunction, and to any and
KOI 23019/1929756-2

and

COMPLAINT

all other relief the Court deems just and proper under the law.
38.

Upon information and belief,', Defendant Tabares directs, controls,

ratifies, participates in, and is the movir g force behind the infringing activity, and is

therefore personally liable for such infrilngement.

THIRD CLA M FOR RELIEF

California Common Law Trademark Infringement

39.

King Taco incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set

forth above in paragraphs 1 through 38, inclusive, as though fully stated herein.
40.

By reason of King Taco's (Continuous use and promotion of the King

10

Taco Trademarks, as well as the distinc liveness of those marks, consumers

11

associate and recognize the King Taco rademarks as representing products and

12

services offered by King Taco, and therefore the King Taco Trademarks are

13

protectable trademarks at common law.

41.

14

The King Taco Trademark^ are the proprietary property of King Taco,

15

which owns and enjoys common law trademark rights in the overall commercial

16

impression and presentations of its Kinis; Taco Trademarks, which rights are

17

superior to any rights that Defendants may claim as to their use of the name, "The

18

King Taco." The King Taco Trademarks have become and are distinctive in the

19

minds of consumers in that the King Ta<.co Trademarks are associated with King

20

Taco.

21

42.

Defendants' unauthorized

use and intentional infringement of the King

22

Taco Trademarks, by offering Mexican food under the confusingly similar name,

23

"The King Taco," is likely to cause

24

consumers as to the source, quality, and^or nature of Defendants' goods and

25

services, thereby committing common l^w trademark infringement, all to the

26

detriment of King Taco.

27
28

43.

connsion,

mistake, and/or deception among

As a direct and proximate lesult of Defendant's wrongful actions, King

Taco has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable injury to its rights, and
K0123019/1929756-2

10

COMPLAINT

suffer substantial loss of goodwill and iin the value of its King Taco Trademarks

unless and until Defendants are enjoined from continuing their wrongful acts,

44.

As such, King Taco is entit ed to damages against all Defendants, and

each of them, in an amount that is subj ect to proof at trial; to a temporary

restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction; and to any and

all other relief the Court deems just and proper under the law.

45.

King Taco is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that

Defendants' conduct was willful, wantoti , malicious, and in conscious disregard of

King Taco's rights in its King Taco Trademarks, justifying an award of punitive

10
11

and exemplary damages under Californi a Civil

46.

Code section 3294.

Upon information and beliqf,', Defendant Tabares, the owner and

authorizes, directs, controls, ratifies,

12

manager of The King Taco, knows of,

13

participates in, and is the moving force behind the infringing activity, and is

14

therefore personally liable for such infringement.

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

15

17
18
19

iaw Unfair Competition

California Common

16

47.

King Taco incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set

forth above in paragraphs 1 through 46, inclusive, as though fully stated herein,
48.

King Taco is the legal

owner

of the King Taco Trademarks, has not

20

abandoned any of the King Taco

21

King Taco Trademarks have been, and cjontinue to be, in continuous use. Despite

22

knowledge of King Taco's ownership interests in the King Taco Trademarks,

23

Defendants, and each of them, have

24

in interstate commerce of the King Taco Trademarks without King Taco's

25

permission.

26

49.

Trademarks

and intentionally continue to make, use

mace

Defendants' unauthorized

since their first use, and all of the

Use of the King Taco Trademarks and

27

confusingly similar variations thereof in connection with the sale of their competing

28

goods and services is likely to cause,

K0123019/1929756-2

an I

has caused, confusion, mistake, and

11

COMPLAINT

deception on the part of the public as to their affiliation, connection, and association

with King Taco, and to cause confusion mistake, and deception as to the source,

sponsorship, or approval of Defendants' goods and services,

50.

The actions of Defendants

described above, and specifically their

unauthorized use of the King Taco

sell their goods and services, intentionally have caused and will cause confusion

among the purchasing public in this Dis rict and elsewhere, thereby engaging in

fraudulent business practices, false

51.

Tradsmarks

advertisin
ising,

to advertise, promote, market, and

and unfair competition.

Defendants, and each of thim , have engaged in a pattern of unfair,

10

deceptive, and fraudulent acts to enrich hemselves by misappropriating King

11

Taco's rights to the King Taco Trademarks and using them for their own benefit.

12

52.

Upon information and belief,', Defendants have undertaken these acts

13

willfully, maliciously, and with the devilous intent to cause confusion, mistake, and

14

deception on the part of the public.

15

16
17

53.

Defendants'acts have damk:ged King Taco's business reputation and

its.
goodwill and unjustly enriched Defendants

54.

Defendants'wrongful acts have caused, and unless enjoined, will

18

continue to cause, irreparable harm and injury to King Taco's business reputation

19

and goodwill for which there is no adeq aate remedy at law. Defendants' acts have

20

also caused, and unless enjoined, will continue to cause inevitable consumer

21

confusion for which there is no adequati remedy at law. King Taco is therefore

22

entitled to a temporary restraining order preliminary injunction, and permanent

23

ing the King Taco Trademarks to advertise,

injunction enjoining Defendants from usine

24

market, and/or sell Defendants' goods

25

55.

aid services,

As a proximate result of th(^ foregoing conduct, King Taco has been

26

harmed and is entitled to damages againlst all Defendants, and each of them, in an

27

amount according to proof at trial, and t|o any and all other relief the Court deems

28

just and proper under the law.

K0123019/1929756-2

12

COMPLAINT

56.

King Taco is informed and believes, and thereon allege, that

Defendants' conduct was willful, wanto|n , malicious, and in conscious disregard of

King Taco's rights in its King Taco Trademarks, justifying an award of punitive

and exemplary damages, under Californ|ia

ia Civil Code section 3294, in an amount

according to proof at trial.

57.

Upon information and belief,', Defendant Tabares, the owner and

manager of "The King Taco," knows of authorizes, directs, controls, ratifies,

participates in, and is the moving force behind the infringing activity, and is

therefore personally liable for such infrihgement.

10

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

11

California Statutory Unfair Competition

58.

12
13

King Taco incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set

forth above in paragraphs 1 through 57, inclusive, as though fully stated herein.
59.

14

King Taco has built valuable goodwill in its King Taco Trademarks.

15

Defendants' advertising, marketing promotion, offer for sale, and/or sale of their

16

goods and services under the confusing,ly similar name, "The King Taco," is likely

17

to and enables Defendants to improper!ly trade upon the goodwill of King Taco's

18

business and confuse the public reg aming the connection or affiliation between

19

King Taco and Defendants.

60.

20

Defendants' advertising, marketing, promotion, offer for sale, and/or

21

sale of their goods and services under the name, "The King Taco," and attempts to

22

pass off their business as being assbciated and/or affiliated with King Taco

23

constitute unfair competition including unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business

24

practices in violation of California Business and Professions Code section 17200 et

25

seq.

26

61.

Defendants' wrongful use of the King Taco Trademarks was, and is,

27

without the consent of King Taco, and has damaged King Taco's business

28

reputation and goodwill, and unjustly enriched Defendants. Defendants' conduct

K0123019/1929756-2

13

COMPLAINT

was intended to cause such damage, loss and injury to King Taco.
62.

Defendants knew or by

exercise

of reasonable care should have known

that their advertising, marketing, promotion , offer for sale, and/or sale of goods and

services would cause confusion, mistake , or deception among consumers, and the

public.

63.

By advertising, marketing. promotion, offer for sale, and/or sale of

Defendants' goods and services, Defendants intended to and did induce, and intends

to and will induce consumers to purch

extensive goodwill built up in Plaintiffs King Taco Trademarks.

10

64.

: their goods and services by trading off the

Defendants' conduct has caused and unless enjoined, will continue to

g Taco's business reputation and goodwill

11

cause irreparable harm and injury to ]

12

for which there is no adequate remedy at law.

13

injunctive relief.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

14

15
16

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff King

Taco

As to the First Claim for Relief:

18

A.

20

Restaurant, Inc., prays for judgment

against Defendants, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and each of them, as follows:

17

19

As such, Plaintiff also seeks

For an order that, by the

acts

complained of herein, Defendants have

infringed King Taco's trademark rights, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114.

B.

For an order awarding Kin g Taco general and/or specific damages, in

21

an amount to be fixed by the Court in according with proof, including enhanced

22

and/or exemplary damages, as appropriate , as well as disgorgement of all of

23

Defendants' profits or gains of any kind from their acts of trademark infringement,

24

unfair competition, deceptive business practices and false advertising; and further

25

for an award that such acts were will nil and wanton, thereby justifying an award,

26

where appropriate, of treble or enhancec. damages.

27
28

C.

For an order awarding Kin g Taco treble Defendants' profits, or treble

King Taco's damages, whichever is grfcater, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(b), for

K0123019/1929756-2

14

COMPLAINT

Defendants' knowing and intentional use of counterfeits of King Taco's federally

registered King Taco Trademarks.

D.

In the alternative to actual damages and Defendants' profits for the

infringement of King Taco's trademarks pursuant to the Lanham Act, for an order

awarding statutory damages, as the Gourt deems just, pursuant to 15 U.S.C.

1117(c), which election King Taco

judgment.

ill make prior to the rendering of final

Wll

As to the Second Claim for Relilef;

E.

For an order that, by the

10

engaged in unfair competition and

11

1125(a).

12

F.

CtS

complained of herein, Defendants have

advertising, in violation of 15 U.S.C.

false

For an order awarding Kirj;g Taco general and/or specific damages, in

accordance to proof, including enhanced

13

an amount to be fixed by the Court

14

and/or exemplary damages, as aippro]briate, as well as disgorgement of all of

15

Defendants' profits or other ill-gotten g:ains of any kind from their acts of trademark

16

infringement, unfair competition, decep ive business practices and false advertising.

17

G.

in

For an order that Defendahts ' conduct, as complained of herein, was

conscious disregard of King Taco's rights,

18

willful, wanton, malicious, and in

19

thereby justifying an award of punitiv and/or exemplary damages in an amount

20

according to proof at trial.

21

As to the Third Claim for Relie

22

H.

23
24

For an order that, by the cts complained of herein, Defendants have

infringed King Taco's common law tracemarks.

I.

For an order awarding Kir g Taco general and/or specific damages, in

25

an amount to be fixed by the Court in accordance with proof, including enhanced

26

and/or exemplary damages, as appropriate, as well as disgorgement of all of

27

Defendants' profits or gains of any kin<fi from their acts of trademark infringement,

28

common law trademark infringement, uhfair competition, and false advertising.

K0123019/1929756-2

15

COMPLAINT

J.

For an order that Defendants ' conduct, as complained of herein, was

willful, wanton, malicious, and in conscious disregard of King Taco's rights,

thereby justifying an award of punitiv^ and/or exemplary damages in an amount

according to proof at trial.

As to the Fourth Claim for Relief

K.

acts complained of herein, Defendants

For an order that, by th

engaged in unfair competition, in violation of the

L.

common law of California.

For an order awarding Kin|:g Taco general and/or specific damages, in

an amount to be fixed by the Court in accordance with proof, including enhanced

10

and/or exemplary damages, as appro{|)riate, as well as disgorgement of all of

11

Defendants' profits or gains of any kind from their acts of trademark infringement,

12

common law trademark infringement, uhfair competition, and false advertising.

13

M.

For an order that Defendants ' conduct, as complained of herein, was

14

willful, wanton, malicious, and in conscious disregard of King Taco's rights,

15

thereby justifying an award of punitiv^ and/or exemplary damages in an amount

16

according to proof at trial.

17

As to the Fifth Claim for Relief:

18

N.

19
20

For an order that, by the 4cts complained of herein, Defendants have

engaged in unfair competition and deceit ive business practices and acts.
0.

For restitution in an amount

to be proven at trial for unfair, fraudulent,

21

and illegal business practices under California Business and Professions Code

22

17200.

23

As to all Claims for Relief:

24

P.

For a temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction, enjoining all

25

Defendants, and each of them, and nheir agents, servants, employees, and all

26

persons acting under or in concert with

27

28

i.

Using

the

King

:hem from:

Taco

Trademarks

in

connection

with

Defendants' goods, marketing, advertisb;g, or promotion materials, or otherwise in

K0123019/1929756-2

16

COMPLAINT

connection with Defendants' business;

ii.

Using confusingly similar variations of the King Taco

Trademarks causing likelihood of confusion , deception, and/or mistake as to the

source, nature, and/or quality of Defendants ' goods and services;

iii.

Otherwise infringing the King Taco Trademarks;

iv.

Using or otherwise irkfringing the King Taco Copyrights;

v.

Otherwise unfairly competing with King Taco in any manner;

vi.

Falsely designating the origin of Defendants' goods and

services; and

vii.

10
11

12

Causing likelihood

of confusion,

mistake, and/or deception as to

the source, nature, and/or quality of Defendants ' goods and services.
Q.

For an order directing the Defendants, and each of them, to file with

13

this Court and serve on King Taco, within thirty (30) days after service of an

14

injunction, a written report, signed undler oath, setting forth, in detail, the manner

15

and form in which Defendants have conjplied with the injunction.

16

17

For an order awarding Kin Taco its costs and attorneys' fees incurred

R.

in prosecuting this action.

18

S.

For an order awarding Kinj Taco pre- and post-judgment interest,

19

T.

For an order awarding such other relief that the Court deems just and

20

proper.

Dated:

October 31, 2014

ARCHER NORRIS

21
22
23

del G. Green
Jihee J. Yoo

24

Attorneys for Plaintiff

KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC.

25
26
27

28
K0123019/1929756-2

17

COMPLAINT

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civi

Procedure Rule 38(b) and Local Rule 38-

1, Plaintiff hereby respectfully demands a trial by jury with respect to all issues and

claims asserted in this action.

5
6

Dated:

October 31, 2014

ARCHER NORRIS

7
8

. Green
Jihee J. Yoo

Attorneys for Plaintiff

KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC.

10
11
12

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

28
KOI 23019/1929756-2

COMPLAINT

EXHIBIT "A"

Int. CI.: 43

Prior U.S. Cls.: 100 and 101

Reg. No. 2,838,200

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Registered May 4, 2004

SERVICE MARK
PRINCIPAL REG] STER

KING TACO

KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC. (CALIFORNIA

CORPORATION)
3421 EAST 14TH STREET

NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE

RIGHT TO USE "TACO", APART FROM THE MARK
ASSKOWN,

LOS ANGELES, CA 90023

FOR: RESTAURANT, TAKE-OUT RESTAURANT

SERVICES, IN CLASS 43 (U.S. CLS. 100 AND 101).

SEP.. NO. 76-518,768, FILED 5-12-2003.

FIRST USE 1-10-1973; IN COMMERCE 1-10-1973.

OWNER OF U.S. REG. NO. 1,210,972.

JAMES A. RAUEN, EXAMINING ATTORNEY

EXHIBIT "B"

Int. CI.: 43
Prior U.S. Cls.: 100 and 101

Reg. No. 2,853,050

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Registered June 15, 2004

SERVICE MARK
PRINCIPAL REGISTER

KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC. (CALIFORNIA

CORPORATION)

RIGflT TO USE "TACO", APART FROM THE MARK

3421 EAST 14TH STREET

ASSKOWN.

NC

CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE

LOS ANGELES, CA 90023

FOR: RESTAURANT, TAKE-OUT RESTAURANT

SERVICES, IN CLASS 43 (U.S. CLS. 100 AND 101).

SEll. NO. 76-518,766, FILED 5-12-2003.

FIRST USE 1-10-1973; IN COMMERCE 1-10-1973.

OWNER OF U.S. REG. NO. 1,210,972.

JAMIS A. RAUEN, EXAMINING ATTORNEY

EXHIBIT "C"

Int. CL: 43

Prior U.S. Cls.: 100 and 101

Reg. No. 2,838,199

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Registered May 4, 2004

SERVICE MA JIK
PRINCIPAL REG ISTER

9
RESTAURANTS, INC.

KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC. (CALIFORNIA

CORPORATION)

RIGKjT TO USE "TACO RESTAURANTS, INC.",

3421 EAST 14TH STREET

APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN.

NC

CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE

LOS ANGELES, CA 90023

FOR: RESTAURANT, TAKE-OUT RESTAURANT

SERVICES, IN CLASS 43 (U.S. CLS. 100 AND 101).

SE1L NO. 76-518,767, FILED 5-12-2003.

FIRST USE 1-10-1973; IN COMMERCE 1-10-1973.

OWNER OF U.S. REG. NO. 1,210,972.

JAMES A. RAUEN, EXAMINING ATTORNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT

SCANNED

CALIFORNIA

CI

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS ( Check box if you are representing yourself CJ )

DE :ENDANTS

KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC.

GILBERTO TABARES

{Check box if you are representing yourself Lj" ;

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Los Angeles

Coiinty of Residence of First Listed Defendant San Bernardino

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

(IN U.S. PLAINTIFFCASES ONLY)

(e) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number) If you are
representing yourself, provide the same information.

Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number) If you are

repr jsenting yourself, provide the same information.

Gabriel G. Green

Archer Norris, PLC

777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 4250

Los Angeles, CA90017
Tel: (213) 437-4000; Fax: (213) 437-4011
III. CITIZE iSH\P OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES-For Diversity Cases Only
(Place fin X in one box for plaintiffand one for defendant)
I|
||
Incorporated or Principal Place
Citizen of Thh state
I I 1 I I 1 of Businessin thisState

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in one box only.)

[~l 1. U.S. Government

|2SI 3. Federal Question (U.S.

Government Not a Party)

Plaintiff

Citizen of Ancther State

l~~l 4. Diversity (Indicate Citizenship

O 2. U.S. Government

Citizen or

Subject of a

Foreign Country

of Parties in Item III)

Defendant

Incorporated and Principal Place

of Business in Another State

Foreign Nation

IV. ORIGIN (Place an X in one box only.)

<3 1. Original

LJ 2 Removed from

Proceeding

LJ 3. Remanded from

State Court

I I 4. Reinstated or LJ 5. Transferred from Another

Reopenep

Appellate Court

V. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND: |EI Yes Q

CLASS ACTION under F.R.Cv.P. 23: Yes [X] No

No

f~]

6. MultiDistrict

Litigation

District (Specify)

( Dheck "Yes" only if demanded in complaint.)

MONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT:

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION (Cite the U.S. Civil Statute underwhich you are filing and write a t rief statement of cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity.)
15 USC 1051, et seq.; 15 USC 1125, et seq. Defendants have infringed jpon Plaintiffs trademarks.

VII. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in one box only)

CONTRACT

OTHER STATUTES

|~| 375 False Claims Act

[1 400 State
'' Reapportionment

Q 410 Antitrust

L~J 110 Insurance

[~| 120 Marine
LJ" 130 Miller Act

| | 430 Banks andBanking

I| 450 Commerce/ICC

LI Rates/Etc.

470 Racketeer Influ

enced & Corrupt Org.

| | 480Consumer Credit

490 Cable/Sat TV

I| 850 Securities/ComI I modifies/Exchange

890 Other Statutory

Actions

| | 891 Agricultural Acts

893 Environmental
Matters

| | 895 Freedom ofInfo.

150 Recovery of
Overpayment &

240 Torts to Land

290 All Other Real

I | 310 Airplane

I Defaulted Student

l' Loan (Excl. Vet.)

153 Recovery of

I I Overpayment of

190 Other

Contract
195 Contract

Product Liability

196 Franchise

REAL PROPERTY

|i 899 Admin. Procedures L~] 210 Land

'' Act/Review ofAppeal of
Condemnation
Agency Decision
I I 220 Foreclosure

320 Assault, Libel &

L' State Statutes

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:

230 Rent Lease &

Ejectment

465 C ther
Immic ration Actions
ORTS

PERSON AL PROPERTY

370 Cither Fraud

371 1 ruth in Lending

11

380 Cither Personal

Propi irty Damage

[1 385 Froperty Damage

Prodjict Liability

330 Fed. Employers'

Liability

345 Marine Product

Liability

nII 422
use

158

360 Other Personal

Injury
. 362 Personal Injury-

CIV L RIGHTS

Other:

| | 540 Mandamus/Other

| | 550 Civil Rights

I

I 555 Prison Condition

Voting
mployment

D443 Mousing/
D445

Acco Timodations
1 imerican with
Disahilities-

4461 imerican with

Disal lilities-Other

I I 448 Ifducation

IaI 840 Trademark

SOCIAL SECURITY

861 HIA(1395ff)
862 Black Lung (923)
863 DIWC/DIWW (405 (g))
664 SSID Title XVI
865 RSI (405 (g))

870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or

871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC

FEDERAL TAX SUITS

Confinement

Defendant)

FORFEITURE/PENALTY

625 Drug Related

Seizure of Property 21
USC 881

| | 690Other
LABOR

710 Fair Labor Standards

Act

720 Labor/Mgmt.
Relations

| 1740 Railway Labor Act

751 Family and Medical

790 Other Labor

Emp oyment

Product Liability

I I 820 Copyrights
L~] 830 Patent

,. 560 Civil Detainee

440 (Ither Civil Rights

D 441
442

!Personal Injury

| | Injury Product Liability

| | 530 General
[~] 535 Death Penalty

fippeal 28

367 Health Care/

Pharmaceutical

I.510 Motions to Vacate

I ISentence

BAh KRUPTCY

Withdrawal 28
n423
"J
USC 57

I I Med Malpratice
I| 365 Personal InjuryI I Product Liability

Habeas Corpus:

| 1463 Alien Detainee

I I Conditions of

| | 350 Motor Vehicle

I| 355 Motor Vehicle
I I Product Liability

368 Asbestos Personal

I I 950 Constitutionality of

Application

| | 340 Marine

L Vet. Benefits

I] 160Stockholders'
L-J Suits

315 Airplane
Product Liability
Slander

PROPERTY RIGHTS

PRISONER PETITIONS

IMM GRATION
462 N aturalization

Property
TORTS
PERSONAL INJURY

152 Recovery of

Liability

Enforcement of

| | 151 Medicare Act

I

245 Tort Product

Judgment

Act

I | 896 Arbitration

Instrument

| | 460 Deportation

140 Negotiable

REAL PROPERTY CONT.

Leave Act
t
1Litigation
1791
791 Employee
Empk
Ret. Inc..
Security Act

Case Number:

CV-71 (10/14)

Jkz*

OCT 3 1 20M!

7609

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL COVER 5IHEET

VIII. VENUE: Your answers to thequestions below will determine thedivision ofthe Court

which this case will be initially assigned. Thisinitial assignmentis subject to

change, in accordance with the Court's General Orders, upon review bythe Courtof yourCompla it or Notice of Removal.
Question A: Was this case removed

STATE CASE WAS PENDING IN THE COUNTY OF:

from state court?

Yes

E] No

If"no," skip to Question B. If"yes," check

the box to the right that applies, enter the
corresponding division in response to

I I Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, or S< nLuis Obispo

Western

I I Orange

Southern

Question E, below, and continue from there.

I I Riverside or San Bernardino

QUESTION B: Is the United States, or

one of its agencies or employees, a

B.1. Do 50% or more of the defendants who reside in

the district reside in Orange Co.?

Eastern

.. YES Your case willinitially be assigned to the Southern Division.

I I Enter "Southern" in response toQuestion E, below, and continue

from there.

PLAINTIFF in this action?

check oneofthe boxes to the right

Yes

wmr

I | NO. Continue toQuestion B.2.

IEI No
B.2. Do 50% or more of the defendants who resde

in

the district reside in Riverside and/or San Bernarldilino

If"no," skip to Question C. If"yes," answer

Question B.1, at right.

Counties? (Consider the two counties together.)

YES. Your case will initially be assigned to the Eastern Division.

| | Enter "Eastern" in response toQuestion E, below, and continue

1' from there.

check one of the boxes to the right

NO. Your case willinitially be assigned to the Western Division.

I I Enter "Western" in response to Question E, below, and continue

QUESTION C: Is the United States, or C.1. Do 50% or more of the plaintiffs who reside
district reside in Orange Co.?
one of its agencies or employees, a

YES. Your case willinitially be assigned to the Southern Division.

| i Enter "Southern" in response toQuestion E, below, and continue

'' from there.

check one ofthe boxes to the right

Yes

from there.

in the

DEFENDANT in this action?

INITIAL DIVISION IN CACD IS:

^^r

No

I I NO. Continue to Question C.2.

If"no," skip to Question D. If"yes." answer

Question C.1, at right.

C.2. Do 50% or more of the plaintiffs who reside

in the

district reside in Riverside and/or San Bernardinc

check one ofthe boxes to the right

YES. Your case will initially be assigned to the Eastern Division.

| | Enter "Eastern" in response toQuestion E, below, andcontinue

Counties? (Consider the two counties together.)

from there.

""^
NO. Your case will initially be assigned to the Western Division.

I I Enter "Western" in response toQuestion E, below, and continue

from there.

QUESTION D: Location of plaintiffs and defendants?

Orange County

Indicate the location(s) in which 50% or more of plaintiffs who reside in this district
reside. (Check up to two boxes, or leave blank if none of these choices apply.)

Indicate the location(s) in which 50% or more of defendants who reside in this
district reside. (Check up to two boxes, or leave blank if none of these choices

app'y)

.
D.1. Is there at least one answer in Column A?

" ' c.,

Los Angeles, Ventura,

Bernardino County

Santa Barbara, or San

Luis Obispo County

D.2. Is there at least one answer in Column B?

Yes [3 No

E3 Yes

If"yes," your case will initially be assigned to the

O No

If"yes," your case will initially be assigned to the EASTERN DIVISION.

SOUTHERN DIVISION.

Enter "Eastern" in response to Question E, below.

Enter "Southern" in response to Question E, below, and continue from there.

If "no," goto question D2 totheright.

B.
Riverside or San

If"no," your case will be assigned to the WESTERN DIVISION.

m^p

Enter "Western" in response toQuestion E, below.

QUESTION E: Initial Division?

Enter the initial division determined by Question A, B, C, or D above:

INITIAL DIVISION IN CACD

Eas ern Division

QUESTION F: Northern Counties?

Do 50% or more of plaintiffs or defendants in this district reside in Ventura, Santa Barliara, or San Luis Obispo counties?
CV-71 (10/14)

CIVIL COVER S 1EET

D Yes

E3 No
Page 2 of 3

American LegalNet, Inc.

www.FormsWorfcHlow.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL COVER S 4EET

IX(a). IDENTICAL CASES: Hasthisaction been previously filed in this court?

NO

YES

IE! NO

YES

Ifyes, listcase number(s):

IX(b). RELATED CASES: Is this case related(as defined below) to any civil or criminal case(s) previously filed in this court?

Ifyes, list case number(s):

Civilcases are related when they (check allthat apply):

LH A. Arise from the same or a closely related transaction, happen ng, or event;
[Zl B. Call for determination of the same or substantially related or similar questions of law and fact;
HI C. For other reasons would entail substantial duplication of labor f heard by different judges.

or

Note: That cases may involve the same patent, trademark, or copyright is lot, in itself, sufficient to deem cases related.

A civil forfeiture case and a criminal case are related when they (check all it at;apply):

f~| A. Arise from the same or a closely related transaction, happen rig. or event;
LH B. Call for determination of the same or substantially related or simililar questions of law

and fact; or

HI C. Involve one or more defendants from the criminal case in common and would entail substantial duplication of
labor if heard by different judges

X. SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY

(OR SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT):

DATE:

10/31/2014

Notice to Counsel/Parties: The submission of this Civil Cover Sheet is required by Local Rule 3-1. This Form CV-71 and the information contained
herein neither replaces nor supplements the filing and service of pleadings or othe papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of
court. For more detailed instructions, see separate instruction sheet (CV-071A).

Key to Statistical codes relating to Social Security Cases:

Nature of Suit Code
861

HIA

Substantive Statement of Cadse of Action

All claims for health insurance benefits (Med care) under Title 18, Part A, of the Social Security Act, as amended,
Also, include claims by hospitals, skilled nur; ing facilities, etc., for certification as providers of services under the
program. (42 U.S.C. 1935FF(b))

862

BL

All claims for "Black Lung" benefits under Tit e 4, Part B, of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. (30
U.S.C. 923)

863

DIWC

863

DIWW

864

SSID

865

Abbreviation

RSI

All claims filed by insured workers for disabil ly insurance benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended;

plus all claims filed for child's insurance benefits based on disability. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))

All claims filed for widows orwidowers insurance benefits based on disability under Title 2 ofthe Social Security Act, as
amended. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))
All claims for supplemental security income r. ayments based upon disability filed under Title 16 of the Social Security Act,
as amended

All claims for retirement (old age) and survivirs benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended.
(42 U.S.C. 405 (g))

CV-71 (10/14)

CIVIL COVER SH :ET

Page 3 of 3
American LcgnlNct, Inc.
www.FormsWorkFlow.com