UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Candyland, Inc.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Cornfields, Inc.,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. ____________________
COMPLAINT
(Jury Trial Demanded)
Plaintiff Candyland, Inc. (Candyland), for its Complaint against Defendant
Cornfields, Inc. (Cornfields), alleges as follows:
PARTIES
1. Candyland is a Minnesota corporation having a principal place of business
in St. Paul, Minnesota.
2. Upon information and belief, Cornfields is an Illinois corporation with its
principal place of business in Waukegan, Illinois.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted in this
action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1121(a) and 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338, and 1367. The
claims alleged in this Complaint arise under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq.,
Minn. Stat 325D.44, et seq., and Minnesota Common Law.
4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Cornfields because Cornfields
does significant business in the State of Minnesota.
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 1 of 11
- 2 -
5. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1) and (c)(2).
FACTS
Candylands CHICAGO MIX Popcorn
6. Candyland is a small-family owned business that has been in business for
over 80 years and specializes in the sale of high-quality popcorn, candy and fine
chocolates.
7. Candylands popcorn comes in a variety of flavors and is popped fresh,
hand-stirred, and bagged every day.
8. Candyland is the owner of federal trademark Registration No. 1,713,984 for
the trademark CHICAGO MIX for use in connection with flavored popcorn.
9. Specifically, Candyland uses its CHICAGO MIX mark in connection
with its combination of traditional seasoned popcorn mixed with caramel and cheddar
flavored popcorns. Candylands CHICAGO MIX popcorn is one of the companys
best sellers.
10. For over two decades, Candyland has been continually and exclusively
using the CHICAGO MIX mark nationwide in interstate commerce to identify its goods
and distinguish its goods from those made and sold by others.
11. Due to the continual use of the CHICAGO MIX mark by Candyland, the
mark has acquired secondary meaning as indicating a single source of Candylands
goods. The CHICAGO MIX mark has further come to indicate Candyland as the single
source of such quality goods.
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 2 of 11
- 3 -
12. Candyland has expended considerable time, resources, and effort in
promoting the CHICAGO MIX mark and developing substantial goodwill associated
therewith.
13. The CHICAGO MIX mark is an extremely important asset to Candyland
and Candyland has enforced the mark against infringers and potential infringers.
Cornfields Infringing CHICAGO MIX Popcorn
14. Upon information and belief, Cornfields is a business in the private label
snack market.
15. Upon information and belief, Cornfields manufactures traditional and
organic popcorn products in a variety of flavors, including a line of flavored popped
popcorn products under the G.H. CRETORS trademark.
16. Upon information and belief, Cornfields G.H. CRETORS line of
flavored popcorn is sold in stores throughout the United States, including Minnesota. In
Minnesota, the G.H. CRETORS line is sold in stores such as Whole Foods, Costco, and
Hy Vee.
17. Upon information and belief, consumers can also purchase G.H.
CRETORS popcorn directly from the G.H. CRETORS website, www.ghcretors.com.
18. Upon information and belief, Cornfields G.H. CRETORS line consists of
a number of flavors of popcorn, including a combination of cheese and caramel corn
mixed together, which Cornfields refers to as CHICAGO MIX.
19. The CHICAGO MIX mark used in connection with Cornfields G.H.
CRETORS flavored popcorn is identical to Candylands CHICAGO MIX mark.
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 3 of 11
- 4 -
20. Without Candylands permission, authorization, approval or consent, and
with actual knowledge of Candylands prior rights in its CHICAGO MIX trademark,
Cornfields commenced use of the confusingly similar CHICAGO MIX mark in
connection with flavored popcorn.
21. Cornfields use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in connection with its
flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception. Consumers have
and are likely to continue to mistakenly believe that the flavored popcorn Cornfields
offers as CHICAGO MIX is sponsored, endorsed, or approved by Candyland, or is in
some other way affiliated, connected, or associated with Candyland, all to the detriment
of Candyland.
22. Upon information and belief, unlike Candylands popped popcorn, which is
popped fresh, hand-stirred, and bagged every day, the G.H. CRETORS line is pre-
bagged and shipped to various stores throughout the country for sale to the consumer
23. Upon information and belief, Candyland and Cornfields target the same
class of consumer.
24. Upon information and belief, Cornfields markets its G.H. CRETORS
popcorn in the same channels of trade used by Candyland to market its CHICAGO
MIX flavored popcorn.
25. Candyland has demanded that Cornfields cease all use of the CHICAGO
MIX mark in connection with Cornfields sale of flavored popcorn, but Cornfields has
refused. Despite Candylands objection, Cornfields continues to use the identical and
confusingly similar CHICAGO MIX mark in connection with closely related products.
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 4 of 11
- 5 -
26. Upon information and belief, Cornfields intentionally adopted the
confusingly similar CHICAGO MIX mark and incorporated in order to trade off the
goodwill Candyland has created in its CHICAGO MIX mark.
Cornfields Disparagement of Candyland
27. On August 1, 2014, and in recognition of Candylands CHICAGO MIX
mark, Facebook removed Cornfields improper use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in
connection with Cornfields promotion of its flavored popcorn through social media
channels.
28. Then next day, August 2, 2014, Zoe L. posted the following on
Yelp.com:
Hate to break the candy-coated facade, but this company's
ownership is completely out of whack. I held great nostalgia
and respect for Candyland until a recent encounter with the
business owner-- their communications with me were
completely unprofessional, aggressive and misplaced. If you
care about how businesses are run, think twice before visiting
this storefront.
I'll opt for a bag of Cretor's Chicago Mix in the future, theirs
is actually better (guaranteed never stale!) and delicious. I
personally vow to spend my hard-earned money elsewhere.
29. Upon information and belief, Zoe L. is sponsored by, affiliated with, an
agent of, or employed by Cornfield.
COUNT I
(Trademark Infringement of a Registered Mark)
(Lanham Act 32, 15 U.S.C. 1114)
30. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 5 of 11
- 6 -
31. Cornfields unauthorized use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in connection
with flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, cause mistake, or to deceive as to the
affiliation, connection, or association of Cornfields with Candyland, or as to the origin,
sponsorship, or approval of Cornfields popcorn products by Candyland. This
unauthorized use of CHICAGO MIX constitutes trademark infringement under 15
U.S.C. 1114.
32. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused, and will continue to cause,
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined.
33. Cornfields has profited from its unlawful actions and has been unjustly
enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused
Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount to be
determined at trial.
COUNT II
(Federal Unfair Competition)
(Lanham Act 43(a), 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))
34. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
35. Cornfields unauthorized use of CHICAGO MIX in connection with
flavored popcorn is a false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact,
and a false or misleading representation of fact.
36. Cornfields unauthorized use of CHICAGO MIX in connection with
flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the
affiliation, connection, or association of Cornfields with Candyland, or as to the origin,
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 6 of 11
- 7 -
sponsorship, or approval of Cornfields flavored popcorn or commercial activities by
Candyland.
37. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused, and will continue to cause,
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined.
38. Cornfields has profited from its unlawful actions and has been unjustly
enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused
Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount to be
determined at trial.
COUNT III
(Minnesota Deceptive Trade Practices Act)
(Minn. Stat. 325D.44, et seq.)
39. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
40. Cornfields unauthorized use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in connection
with flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to
the affiliation, connection, or association of Cornfields with Candyland, or as to the
origin, sponsorship, or approval of Cornfields flavored popcorn or commercial activities
by Candyland and constitutes unfair and deceptive trade practices under the Deceptive
Trade Practices Act of the State of Minnesota.
41. Upon information and belief, Cornfields, in the course of business has
disparaged the goods, services, and business of Candyland through false or misleading
representations of fact.
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 7 of 11
- 8 -
42. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused and will continue to cause
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined, and its actions also create a risk of future
harm.
43. Cornfields has profited from its unlawful actions and has been unjustly
enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused
Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount to be
determined at trial.
COUNT IV
(Common Law Unfair Competition)
44. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
45. Cornfields unauthorized use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in connection
with flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to
the affiliation, connection, or association of Cornfields with Candyland, or as to the
origin, sponsorship, or approval of Cornfields flavored popcorn or commercial activities
by Candyland and constitutes common law unfair competition under Minnesota state law.
46. Cornfields disparagement of Candyland constitutes common law unfair
competition.
47. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused, and will continue to cause,
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined.
48. Cornfields has profited from its unlawful actions and has been unjustly
enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Cornfields unlawful actions have caused
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 8 of 11
- 9 -
Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount to be
determined at trial.
CONCLUSION
WHEREFORE, Candyland prays that the Court enter judgment:
1. In favor of Candyland and against Cornfields on all of Candylands claims;
2. Permanently enjoining and restraining Cornfields, its parent company,
subsidiaries, affiliates, sister companies, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys,
and all others in active concert or participation with Cornfields from:
A. Using the mark CHICAGO MIX or any confusingly similar
designation alone or in combination with other words or designs, as a trademark,
trade name component or otherwise, to market, advertise, or identify goods and
services not produced or authorized by Candyland;
B. Unfairly competing with Candyland in any manner whatsoever;
C. Causing likelihood of confusion or injury to business reputation of
the distinctiveness of Candylands CHICAGO MIX mark; and
D. Committing any other act that infringes Candylands CHICAGO
MIX mark or constitutes an act of trademark or service mark infringement,
contributory infringement, or unfair competition under federal common law or
Minnesota state law.
3. Requiring Cornfields to deliver up, or cause to be delivered up, for
destruction all labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, advertisements, and
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 9 of 11
- 10 -
all other materials in Cornfields possession or control that infringe Candylands
CHICAGO MIX mark;
4. Requiring Cornfields to account for and pay over to Candyland the amount
of Candylands damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
5. Requiring Cornfields to account for and pay over to Candyland the amount
of Cornfields profits pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
6. Requiring Cornfields to account for and pay over to Candyland the costs of
the action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
7. Finding this case is exceptional and trebling any damage award pursuant to
15 U.S.C. 1117;
8. Finding this case is exceptional and requiring Cornfields to pay over to
Candyland its attorneys fees incurred in connection with this case pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
1117;
9. Requiring Cornfields to account for and pay over to Candyland the amount
of Candylands damages, together with costs and disbursements, including costs of
investigation and reasonable attorneys fees;
10. Requiring Cornfields to pay Candyland pre- and post- judgment interest,
pursuant to Minn. Stat. 549.09; and
11. Awarding Candyland such other relief as the Court may deem just and
equitable.
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 10 of 11
- 11 -
Respectfully submitted,
WINTHROP & WEINSTINE, P.A.
Dated: August 7, 2014 s/David A. Davenport
David A. Davenport, #285109
Erin O. Dungan, #386430
3500 Capella Tower
225 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Tel: (612) 604-6400
Fax: (612) 604-6800
E-Mail: ddavenport@winthrop.com
edungan@winthrop.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Candyland, Inc.
9371407v2
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 11 of 11
J S 44 (Rev. 12112)
CIVIL COVER SHEET
The J S 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by theJ udicial Conference of the United States inSeptember 1974, isrequired for the use of the Clerk of Court forthe
purpose of initiating thecivil docket sheet. (.SEEINSTRUC710NS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS
Candyland,Inc.
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff fuI_IllS~_QQ._UJ lty _
(EXCEPT IN u .s . PLAINTIFF CASES)
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Addres s , and Telephone Nu mber)
Winthrop&Weinstine,P.A.,3500CapellaTower,225SouthSixthStreet,
Minneapolis,MN55402(612)604-6400
Attorneys (If Known)
Cornfields,Inc.
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant J "ak~COLJ l1!Y ,lJ J ln9j _ ___ _
(IN u .s . PLAINl1H" CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCA nON OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
II. BASIS OF J URISDICTION (Place an "X" in One Box Only)
01 u.s. Government l1'l3 Federal Question
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party)
02 U.S. Government 04 Diversity
Defendant (Indicate Citizens hip of Parties in Item JJJ)
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an "X" in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Divers ity Cas es Only) and One Box for Defendant)
PTF DEF PTF DEF
Citizen of This State 0 I 0 I Incorporated or Principal Place 0 4 0 4
of Business InThis State
o 2 0 2 Incorporated Gild Principal Place
of Business In Another State
Citizen of Another State o 5 05
Citizen or Subj ect of a
Foreign Country
o 3 0 3 Foreign Nation o 6 06
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an "X" in One Box Only)
Ib&1~i'4%% \2;';@tmN~~ftl~%11t1fi0';1\~
o 110Insurance
o 120Marine
o 130Miller Act
o 140Negotiable Instrument
o 150Recovery of Overpayment
&Enforcement of J udgment
o 15I Medicare Act
o 152Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans
(Excludes Veterans)
o 153Recovery of Overpayment
of Veteran's Benefits
o 160Stockholders' Suits
o 190Other Contract
o 195Contract Product Liability
o 196Franchise
PERSONAL INJ URY
o365 Personal Inj ury -
Product Liability
o367 Health Care!
Pharmaceutical
Personal Inj ury
Product Liability
o368 Asbestos Personal
Inj ury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY 0 710 Fair Labor Standards o861 H1A (1395ft)
o 862 Black Lung (923)
o 863 D1WC/D1WW (405(g
o 864 ssmTitle XVI
o865 RSI (405(g
PERSONAL INJ URY
o310 Airplane
0315 Airplane Product
Liability
o320 Assault, Libel &
Slander
o330 Federal Employers'
Liability
o340 Marine
o345 Marine Product
Liability
o350 Motor Vehicle 0 370 Other Fraud Act
0355 Motor Vehicle 0 371 Truth inLending 0 720 Labor/Management
Product Liability 0 380 Other Personal Relations
o360 Other Personal Property Damage 0 740 Railway Labor Act
Inj ury 0 385 Property Damage 0 751 Family and Medical
o362 Personal Inj ury - Product Liability Leave Act
Medical Malpractice 0 790 Other Labor Litigation
!fMS MWifli'EA'UitlR:Ol!:Ellij;y)iii W IN! ? !liJ MiM()mE\RtG lfl1s~r@ ;ii: %em 0i!tlRlSOlY F:R!P'E\lJ l.ftf)ll)lSlS}T 0 791 Employee Retirement
o210 Land Condemnation 0 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act
o220 Foreclosure 0 441 Voting 0 463 Alien Detainee
o230 Rent Lease &Ej ectment 0 442 Employment 0 510 Motions to Vacate
o240 Torts to Land 0 443 Housing! Sentence
o245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 0 530 General
o290 All Other Real Property 0 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 0 535 Death Penalty
Employment Other:
o446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 0 540 Mandamus & Other
Other 0 550 Civil Rights
o448 Education 0 555 Prison Condition
o560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
Act/Review or Appeal of
Agency Decision
o 950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes
o422 Appeal 28 USC 158
o423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
o625 Drug Related Seizure
of Property 21 USC 881
0690 Other
o 375 False Claims Act
o 400 State Reapportionment
o410Antitrust
"""=========~0 430 Banks and Banking
\ll%\j "libRERTi\%Rn:~ll!lit'''''%WF 0 450 Commerce
o820 Copyrights 0 460 Deportation
o830 Patent 0 470 Racketeer Influenced and
l1'l 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
o 480 Consumer Credit
.gggD~~gee.e:m!ii~!ilmimaee~ 0 490 Cable/Sat TV
o 850 Securities/Commodities/
Exchange
o 890 Other Statutory Actions
o 891 Agricultural Acts
o 893 Environmental Matters
o 895 Freedom oflnformation
Act
o 896 Arbitration
"'''~lli!-fjF-'... -E~D-E"',rus."'}"" .. t"'M!l1-., .,-~- !X -fS-J = :nF-m= ..S= il'''''i$ i"."j,! ~ 0 899 Administrative Procedure
o870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
or Defendant)
o871 IRS-Third Party
26 USC 7609
"'>Y ;>J MMIO~T10N i'? " '
o462 Naturalization Application
o465 Other Immigration
Actions
V. ORIG IN (Place an "X" in One Box Only)
)g{ I Original 0 2 Removed from
Proceeding State Court
o 3 Remanded from
Appellate Court
o4 Reinstated 01'
Reopened
o 5 Transferred from
Another District
(s pecify)
o 6 Multi district
Litigation
Cite theU.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (DoIIOt citeju ris dictlonalstatutes u nles s divers ity):
VI. CAUSEOFACTION~1_5_U_.S_._C~.~10_5_1_e_ts_e~q_. ----------------------------------------
Brief description of cause:
TrademarkInfringement
VII. REQUESTED IN
COMPLAINT:
o CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION
UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.
DEMAND $ CHECK Y ES only if demanded incomplaint:
J URY DEMAND: )ell Y es 0 No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
IFANY
J UDGE DOCKET NUMBER
(See ins tru ctions ):
DATE
08/07/2014
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
s/David Davenport
RECEIPT # APPLY ING IFP J UDGE MAG. J UDGE AMOUNT
CASE 0:14-cv-03119 Document 1-1 Filed 08/07/14 Page 1 of 1