2business in this district and elsewhere. Therefore, Defendants are subject to jurisdiction in thisDistrict.4.
This action arises under the Acts of Congress for trademark infringement underthe Lanham Act, Title 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq., and common law.
This is an action is also forfalse designation of origin and unfair competition in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) andcommon law.5.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 1121(a) and 28U.S.C. § 1338(a), as this dispute contemplates, in part, federal questions arising under Section 43of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125.6.
Subject matter jurisdiction over the non-federal questions raised herein is properunder 28 U.S.C. § 1367, as such claims are so related to the federal question claims that theyform part of the same case and controversy.7.
The subject matter of this Court is also invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1391.8.
Venue is proper in this District in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
PLAINTIFF’S BUSINESS AND TRADEMARK RIGHTS
9.
Plaintiff, Hy-Vee, Inc. operates more than 220 retail stores in eight Midwesternstates, including Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota andWisconsin. Hy-Vee, Inc. is the owner of a great number of federal trademark and service mark registrations for its famous “Hy-Vee” mark, including U.S. Service Mark Registration No.2,076,819.
1
(Ex. 1).
1
Hy-Vee, Inc. also owns the following federal registrations for the mark “HY-VEE” or variations thereof including:
DR. HY-VEE
2,608,001;
HY-VEE
(design) 3,217,660;
HY-VEE
(word mark) 3,217,662 &3,217,663;
HY-VEE BLUE RIBBON BEEF SATISFACTION GUARANTEED
(stylized) 3,672,607;
HY-VEE COMPLETE CAT
3,164,159;
HY-VEE COMPLETE DOG
3,551,923;
HY-VEEDRUGSTORE
3,123,338;
HY-VEE DU JOUR
(design) 3,355,723;
HY-VEE ENRICH
(stylized)
Case 4:11-cv-00344-GKF -TLW Document 2 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 06/02/11 Page 2 of 11
Add a Comment