|
enjoy
among consumers, and to tarnish that reputation by associating
Starbucks' trademark with coffee
that is overroasted, and thus unappealing. As a result of defendant's
actions, Starbucks reputation
for premium quality is being diluted, the value of its trademark is
being diminished, and
consumers are being misled and confused. This action seeks injunctive
relief and damages for
the harm defendant has caused. JURISDICTION
AND VENUE 3.
Subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted in this
Complaint is based upon:
(i) 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) as an action arising under the
Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§
1051 et. seq.; and the Trademark Dilution Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(c)
and 1127; and (ii)
28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) as an action between citizens of different states
where the matter in controversy
exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
Subject matter jurisdiction
over those of Plaintiffs' claims that arise under state law is based
upon the principles of
supplemental jurisdiction set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1367, and the
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1338(b) as an action asserting a claim for unfair
competition joined with a substantial and related
claim under the trademark laws. 4.
Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that
venue of this action is
proper in the district pursuant to:
(i) 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) in that a substantial part of the events
given to the claims herein occurred in this judicial district; and/or
(ii) 28 U.S.C. § 1400, in that
defendant has committed acts of infringement and regularly sells the
product that is the subject of this action in this district. THE
PARTIES 5.
Plaintiff Starbucks is a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the State of Washington, with its principal place of business
located in Seattle, Washington. Since - 2 - NY-1166157vl |