1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(j)
-0..
J:~ 11
~O
~F 12
.0
~GJ 13
0_J
-_J
0::0 14
OJ:
gCf 15
OZ
F-O:: 16
~L5
(j)X:_ 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

NICHOLAS J. SANTORO, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 00532 nsantoro@nevadafirm.com

JAMES D. BOYLE, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 08384 jboyle@nevadafirm.com

SANTORO, DRIGGS, WALCH, KEARNEY, HOLLEY & THOMPSON 400 South Fourth Street, Third Floor Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

Telephone: 702/791-0308

Facsimile: 702/791-1912

David Stewart, Esq.

Georgia Bar/No. 681149 dstewart@alston.com

Nadya Munasifi, Esq. Georgia Bar No. 156051 nmunasifi@alston.com ALSTON & BIRD LLP

1201 West Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424

Telephone: 404/881-7000

Facsimile: 404/881-7777

Pro Hac Vice Applications Forthcoming

Attorneys for Caesars World, Inc.

CAESARS WORLD, INC., a Florida corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARCEL JUL Y, an individual; and OCTAVIUS TOWER LLC, a Nevada limited liability company,

Defendants.

CASE NO.:

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Caesars World, Inc. ("Caesars") files this Complaint against Defendants Marcel

July ("July") and Octavius Tower LLC ("OTLLC") (collectively "Defendants") and in support

thereof alleges as follows:

III

04089-001720538.doc

- 1 -

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
'0..
I2: 11
~O
~F 12
.0
~W 13
G_J
-_J
et:O 14
°I
gGi 15
OZ
ret: 16

«W
(f)'::<::. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 NATURE AND BASIS OF ACTION

1. This is an action for a declaratory judgment pursuant to the federal Declaratory

Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-02, and the declaratory judgment statutes of Nevada and

Florida, as well as for cancellation of federal and state service mark registrations owned by July. Specifically, Caesars seeks a declaration of non-infringement of Defendants' claimed rights in

the service mark and trade name OCTAVIUS TOWER and associated domain names, and

cancellation of July's federal and state service mark registrations in Nevada and Florida for the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark.

PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. Caesars is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of

Florida, having its principal place of business at One Caesars Palace Drive, Las Vegas, Nevada

89109.

3. OTLLC is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of

the State of Nevada and can be served process through its registered agent Corporate Creations

Network at 8275 South Eastern Avenue # 200, Las Vegas, Nevada 89123.

4. July is an individual who, upon information and belief, resides in Port Charlotte,

Florida and can be served process at 21216 Argyle Ave., Port Charlotte, Florida 33954-3147. July is the managing member of OTLLC.

5. This Court has original jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant

to 15 U.S.C. § 1121,28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337 and 1338, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, this

being an action to have declared the rights and other legal relations of the parties.

6. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Caesars' claims under state law

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over OTLLC because it is a citizen of this

State and the claims asserted in this action arise out of OTLLC's transaction of business in this

state and assertion of legal rights under the laws of this State.

8. This Court has personal jurisdiction over July because this action arises from

July's conduct and claimed legal rights in Nevada and this judicial district.

- 2 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
-0..
I 2:; 11
~O
~F 12
.0
~GJ 13
0_J
-_J
0.::0 14
°I
0':..: 15
o.::w
OZ
~o.:: 16
~~
(f)'X. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 9. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

FACTS GIVING RISE TO THIS ACTION

Caesars and Its OCTAVIUS TOWER Mark

10. Caesars, through wholly-owned subsidiaries, is the owner and operator of the

famous CAESARS PALACE branded casino hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, and CAESARS

branded casino hotel in Atlantic City, New Jersey, and is the operator of a CAESARS branded casino hotel in Ontario, Canada and a CAESARS branded casino in Cairo, Egypt.

11. The Caesars Palace casino is located in the heart of the strip in Las Vegas, Nevada

and was opened on August 5, 1966. As a result of its location, quality of service, andsize, the

Caesars Palace casino and hotel has enjoyed and continues to enjoy widespread recognition and

success, and is one of the most famous hotels in theworld.

12. On average, approximately 1.5 million people stay at Caesars Palace each year.

Millions more from around the world visit the casino, dine at Caesars' restaurants and cafes, or

watch a show in Caesars' 4,l00-seat theater named the Colosseum.

13. Built around a Roman theme, Caesars Palace features more than 3,300 hotel guest

rooms and suites in five towers, which towers are named Augustus, Centurion, Forum, Palace,

and Roman.

14. On July 19, 2007, the parent company of Caesars, Harrah's Entertainment, Inc.

(now known as Caesars Entertainment Corporation), issued a widely published press release that announced plans for a $1 billion expansion of Caesars Palace. A true and correct copy of the press release is attached as Exhibit A. The announced centerpiece of this expansion was the

building of a new 665 room tower named "Octavius Tower."

15. Caesars has issued several additional press releases regarding its Octavius Tower,

and the tower has been the subject of numerous news articles and other publicity that have

caused Caesars' plans to become well known to the consuming public. As a result, the

OCTAVIUS TOWER name and mark has achieved significant notoriety in the United States.

16. Octavius Tower opened its doors on September 11,2009, with the launch of three

luxury villas that are each more than 8,000 square feet in size and rent for $40,000 per night.

- 3 -

04089-00/720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(j)
'0..
G~ 11
::.JO
~~ 12
.~
~(J 13
Q....J
-....J
0:::0 14
°I
o ',.;' 15
o:::w
02
F-O::: 16
~i5
(j)'X:. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 17. On July 20, 2007, Caesars, through its affiliate Caesars License Company, LLC,

formerly known as Harrah's License Company, LLC (collectively "Caesars"), filed an intent-touse service mark application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") for the mark

OCTAVIUS TOWER for "hotel services" in International Class 43. The USPTO assigned the application Serial Number 77/235,142 (hereinafter the "First Caesars Application").

18. On January 29,2008, the USPTO issued Caesars a Notice of Allowance regarding

its application and set a deadline of January 29,2011 for Caesars to file a Statement of Use.

19. Due to a delay in construction and full opening of the tower as a result of the

downturn in the economy, Caesars was unable to provide the USPTO with a suitable specimen of

use prior to the January 29, 2011 deadline, thereby resulting in the abandonment of the

application.

20. Nevertheless, prior to abandoning its application, Caesars filed a new intent-to-

use application with theUSPTO for the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark on December 14,2010 for the same services. The USPTO assigned the application Serial Number 851197,796 (hereinafter the "Second Caesars Application").

July and His Unlawful Actions

A. July's Infringing Domain Name Registrations

21. On July 20, 2007, two days after Caesars announced its plans to build Octavius

Tower, July registered the domain names <octaviustower.com>; <octaviustowers.com>;

<octaviustowerlasvegas.com>; <octaviustowerslasvegas.com> (collectively the "OCTAVIUS Domain Names"). On the same day, July also registered the domain names

<caesarstower. com>; <caesarstowers. com>; <caesarspalacetower. com>;

<caesarspalacetowers.com>; and <caesarspalacetowerslasvegas.com> (collectively the

"CAESARS Domain Names") (all OCTAVIUS Domain Names and CAESARS Domain Names

referred to collectively as the "Infringing Domain Names").

22. July used the OCTAVIUS Domain Names as addresses for web sites that stated

"The new Caesars Palace Towers are Coming Soon!." The web sites also included offers to sell

- 4 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
"0...
IL:; 11
So
~F 12
.0
~GJ 13
C)_j
-_j
0::0 14
°I
~Gi· 15
OZ
1--0:: 16
~~
(f)'.:C 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 each of the Infringing Domain Names next to four photographs of Caesars Palace. True and

correct copies of print-outs of July's web sites are attached as Exhibit B.

23. Through correspondence sent to July in September 2007, Caesars demanded that

July transfer the Infringing Domain Names to Caesars.

24. When July refused to do so, Caesars filed a domain name arbitration complaint

with the National Arbitration Forum ("NAF") under ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("UDRP"), alleging that July had registered and used the CAESARS Domain

Names in bad faith. Because a registration had not yet issued for Caesars' First Service Mark

Application, Caesars did not address the OCTAVIUS Domain Names in its UDRP complaint.

25. The NAF found that July's registration of the CAESARS Domain Names two

days after Caesars announced its plans to open its new tower was "opportunistic action"

undertaken in bad faith. Caesars World, Inc. v. Marcel July Ra Christian Kaldenhoff, Nat'l Arb.

Forum, FA 0801001126341 (March 3, 2008). The NAF panel therefore ordered that the

CAESARS Domain Names be transferred to Caesars. A true and correct copy of the NAF's

decision is attached as Exhibit C.

B. July's OCTAVIUS TOWER Service Mark Registrations

26. On May 7, 2008, July filed a federal service mark application with the USPTO to

register the mark OCTAVIUS TOWER for "Entertainment services, namely, providing a web

site featuring musical performances, musical videos, related film clips and photographs" 111

International Class 41. The USPTO assigned the application Serial No. 77/467,916.

27. In his application, July claimed a date of first use of the mark in connection with

the subject services of February 4, 1992, and a date of first use in commerce of June 8,1993.

28. The USPTO found no likelihood of confusion between July's mark and Caesars'

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark for hotel services, which was the subject of Caesars' then pending

first application for the mark.

29. The USPTO granted registration to July's mark on September 1, 2009, and issued

July Certificate of Registration No. 3,675,168 for the mark (hereinafter the "Website

Registration").

- 5 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
-0..
I:L 11
~O
~F 12
,~
~(;j 13
C)_j
-_j
0::0 14
°I
gCf 15
OZ
F-O::: 16
~L5
(f)'c:(. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 30. Upon information and belief, July has not made bona fide use of the mark

OCTAVIUS TOWER in the United States for any of the services identified in the Website

Registration.

31. Upon further information and belief, July did not first use the OCTAVIUS

TOWER mark for any of the services identified in the Website Registration as of the dates of

first use claimed in his registration, and July knew the same when he filed his application to

register the mark with the USPTO.

32. On July 23, 2009, July filed a second service mark registration application with

the USPTO to register the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in connection with "Entertainment in the

nature of visual and audio performances, and musical, variety, news and comedy shows;

Presentation of live show performances; Theatrical and musical floor shows provided at

discotheques and nightclubs; Theatrical and musical floor shows provided at performance

venues" in International Class 41. The USPTO assigned the application Serial No. 771787,941.

33. In his application, July claimed a date of first use of the mark in connection with

the subject services of February 4, 1992, and a date of first use in commerce of June 8, 1993 -

the same dates claimed in his first application.

34. The USPTO found no likelihood of confusion between July's mark and Caesars'

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark for hotel services.

35. The USPTO granted registration to July's mark on September 1,2009, and issued

July Certificate of Registration No. 3,675,168 for the mark (hereinafter the "Floor Show

Registration").

36. Upon information and belief, July has never used the mark OCTAVIUS TOWER

in the United States for any of the services identified in the Floor Show Registration.

37. Upon further information and belief, July did not first use the OCTAVIUS

TOWER mark for any of the services identified in the Floor Show Registration as of the dates of

first use claimed in his registration, and July knew the same when he filed his application to

register the mark with the USPTO.

- 6 -

04089-00/720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
"CL
IL 11
~O
~F 12
.~
~GJ 13
O_J
-_J
0::0 14
°I
0" -.,: 15
(tGJ
OZ
1--0:: 16
~~
(f)':<. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 38. In addition to his two federal registrations, July also owns the following Nevada

and Florida state service mark registrations - each of which was filed for after Caesars' 2007

press release:

a. Nevada Reg. No. E0360772009-9 for the mark OCTAVIUS TOWER in

U.S. Class 101 for "entertainment services, namely providing a web site featuring musical

performances, musical videos, related film clips and photographs" with a claimed date of first

use in Nevada of April 6, 2008.

b. Nevada Reg. No. E0360792009-1 for the mark OCTAVIUS TOWER in

U.S. Class 107 for "entertainment services, namely providing a web site featuring musical

performances, musical videos, related film clips and photographs" with a claimed date of first

use in Nevada of April 6, 2008.

c. Nevada Reg. No. E0495922009-0 for the mark OCTAVIUS TOWER in

U.S. Class 107 for "entertainment in the nature of visual and audio performances, and music

variety, news and comedy show; presentation of live show performances; theatrical and musical

floor shows provided on stage" with a claimed date of first use in Nevada of April 6, 2006.

d. Florida Reg. No. T09,000,000,664 for the mark OCTAVIUS TOWER for

"entertainment services, a name of a band, providing web site featuring musical performances,

musical videos, related film clips & photographs," with a claimed date of first use in Florida of

May 10,2008.

39. Upon information and belief, July formed OTLLC on November 6, 2009, and

July is OTLCC's managing member.

July's Threats to Caesars

40. Despite the USPTO's prior finding that there is no likelihood of confusion

between Caesars' OCTAVIUS TOWER mark for hotel services and July's use of the mark for

entertainment services, the USPTO issued an office action to Caesars on February 24, 2011

regarding the Second Caesars Application in which the USPTO cited a likelihood of confusion

between Caesars' mark and July's Floor Show Registration. The USPTO did not cite a likelihood of confusion with July's Website Registration.

- 7 -

04089·00/720496.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(j)
-n_
I~ 11
So
~F 12
.0
~(;j 13
Q_j
-_j
0::0 14
°I
~Lj 15
OZ
1--0:: 16
~L5
(j)~ 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 41. Approximately two weeks later, counsel for July sent a cease and desist letter to

Caesars in which he identified his client's federal and Nevada service mark registrations and

stated that his client agrees with the USPTO that there is a likelihood of confusion between the

parties' marks. July's counsel demanded that Caesars "cease and desist using [July's]

Trademarked name 'Octavius Tower' in any manner whatsoever, including, but not limited to,

'cyber squatting' ... billboard signs, print or broadcast ads, brochures, and any and all other

forms of displaying this Trademarked name." July's counsel further threatened that "[fjailure to

do so immediately will result in our client pursuing all legal remedies available to him." A true

and correct copy of July's cease and desist letter is attached as Exhibit D.

42. On March 21, 2011, Caesars' counsel sent a response letter to July's counsel. In

the response, Caesars disagreed that there was a likelihood of confusion between the parties'

respective uses of their marks and offered to enter into an appropriate written co-existence

agreement with July. A true and correct copy of Caesars' response letter is attached as Exhibit

E.

43. In a reply letter dated March 23,2011, July's counsel rejected the possibility of a

co-existence agreement and demanded once again that Caesars cease and desist using the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark. The letter further threatened that "[f]ailure to do so will result in

our client taking all legal actions deemed appropriate to protect his Trademarks." A true and

correct copy of July's reply letter is attached as Exhibit F.

44. Subsequent to this letter, July modified his website at the domain name

<octaviustower.com> to add a page that includes Caesars' 2007 announcement of its plan to

launch Octavius Tower and includes copies of the correspondence his counsel sent to Caesars.

45. July further modified the website to add the following:

TRADEMARH WARnInG r OCTAVIUS TOWER (R)

WE THE LnUlFUL REGISTERED OUlnERS OF THE nBOVE SERVICEmnRH un» EnJOY EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO USE THE stunt: Any unnUTHORIZED USE OF OUR mnRH UliLL nmmnn' TO VIOLnTIons OF OUR STRTUTORY RIGHTS nnD UliLL RTTRRCT CIVIL RnD / OR CRImInRL ACTIon

- 8 -

04089-001720538. doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
If)
.0...
1:2,: 11
~O
~F 12
.0
~GJ 13
(')...1
-...1
0::0 14
OJ:
Or 15
o::w
OZ
F-O:: 16
~l7J
If)'X. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 COUNT I

Declaration of Non-Infringement of Defendants' Alleged Rights under the Federal Lanham Act

46. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-45

above as if fully set forth herein.

47. There is an actual and justiciable case or controversy between the parties as a

result of Defendants' allegations that Caesars' use and planned use of the OCTAVIUS TOWER

mark infringes Defendants' claimed rights under federal law in the same mark and name for

different and unrelated services, and Defendants' demand that Caesars cease use of its mark.

48. Caesars does not infringe, and at all times has not infringed, any service mark,

trade name or domain name rights, if any, Defendants own under federal law by Caesars'

offering and plans to offer hotel services at Caesars Palace under the OCTA VIUS TOWER

mark. Caesars is therefore entitled to a declaration under the federal Declaratory Judgment Act,

28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202, that Caesars' use and planned use of the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark

does not violate any putative rights Defendants own under the federal Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.

§ 1051 etseq.

COUNT II

Declaration of Non-Infringement

of Defendants' Alleged Rights Under Nevada Law

49. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-48

above as if fully set forth herein.

50. There is an actual and justiciable case or controversy between the parties as a

result of Defendants' allegations that Caesars' use and planned use of the OCTAVIUS TOWER

mark infringes Defendants' claimed rights under Nevada law in the same mark and name for

different and unrelated services.

51. Caesars does not infringe, and at all times has not infringed, any service mark,

trade name or domain name rights, if any, Defendants own under Nevada law by Caesars'

offering and plans to offer hotel services at Caesars Palace under the OCTAVIUS TOWER

- 9 -

04089·00/720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
-Q_
I2: 11
~O
~~ 12
.1-6
~GJ 13
Q_j
-_j
0:::0 14
°I
0'-.,.: 15
o:::w
OZ
f-O::: 16
Z<{
«W
(f)~ 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 mark. Caesars is therefore entitled to a declaration under the Nevada declaratory judgment

statute, NEV. REv. STAT. § 30.030, that Caesars' use and planned use of the OCTAVIUS

TOWER mark does not violate any putative rights Defendants own under Nevada law.

COUNT III

Declaration of Non-Infringement

of Defendants' Alleged Rights Under Florida Law

52. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-51

above as if fully set forth herein.

53. There is an actual and justiciable case or present controversy between the parties

as a result of Defendants' allegations that Caesars' use and planned use of the OCT A VIUS

TOWER mark infringes rights Defendants claim to own in the same mark and name for different

and unrelated services.

54. Caesars does not infringe, and at all times has not infringed, any service mark,

trade name or domain name rights, if any, Defendants own under Florida law by Caesars'

offering and plans to offer hotel services at Caesars Palace under the OCTAVIUS TOWER

mark. Caesars is therefore entitled to a declaration under the Florida declaratory judgment

statute, FLA. STAT. §§ 86.011 and 86.021, that Caesars' use and planned use of the OCTAVIUS

TOWER mark does not violate any putative rights Defendants own under Florida law.

COUNT IV

Cancellation of July's Federal Service Mark Registrations for Non-Use or Abandonment

55. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-54

above as if fully set forth herein.

56. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1119, "[i]n any action involving a registered mark the

court may ... order the cancellation of registrations, in whole or in part ... and otherwise rectify

the register with respect to the registrations of any party to the action."

57. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1051, a mark does not qualify for registration on the

Principal Register of the USPTO until the applicant has made bona fide use of the mark in

- 10 -

04089-00/720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
ID..
O:::i: 11
_j0
~F 12
.~
~GJ 13
<.:)_j
-_j
0::0 14
°I
gGi 15
oz
F-O:: 16
~L5
(f)'X:. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 commerce in the United States for each of the goods and/or services identified in a registration application.

58. Pursuant to 15 US.C. § 1064, a registration may be cancelled at any time if the

court determines that the registered mark has been abandoned.

59. Upon information and belief, July has never used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark

in commerce in the United States for entertainment services in the nature of a website featuring

musical videos or related film clips, as set forth in the Website Registration, or for any of the services identified in the Floor Show Registration. Upon further information and belief, if July has used the mark for any of the foregoing services at any time, he has abandoned the mark for

the services within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1127.

60. Upon information and belief, July has never made bona fide use of the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in commerce in the United States for entertainment services in the

nature of a website featuring musical performances or photographs, as set forth in the Website

Registration. Rather, upon information and belief, he began use of the mark for these services

only after becoming aware of Caesars' planned use of the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark for hotel

services and in an effort to fabricate legal rights to be asserted against Caesars. Such use is not

bona fide use and does not support a valid service mark registration in the United States.

61. Based on the foregoing, Caesars is entitled to an order pursuant to 15 US.C.

§ 1119 directing the Director of the Trademark Office to cancel US. Registration Nos. 3,675,168

and 3,736,945.

COUNT V

Cancellation of July's Federal Service Mark Registrations Based on Fraud

62. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-61

above as if fully set forth herein.

63. Pursuant to 15 US.C. § 1119, "[i]n any action involving a registered mark the

court may ... order the cancellation of registrations, in whole or in part ... and otherwise rectify

the register with respect to the registrations of any party to the action."

- 11 -

04089-00/720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
"0..
J:L: 11
~O
~~ 12
.0
~CJ 13
(')....J
-....J
ct:o 14
OJ:
0'>.,;· 15
ct:w
oz
F-n:: 16
~l5
(f)':<. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 64. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1120, "[a]ny person who shall procure registration in the

Patent and Trademark Office of a mark by a false or fraudulent declaration or representation, oral

or in writing, or by any false means, shall be liable in a civil action by any person injured thereby

for any damages sustained in consequence thereof."

65. Pursuant to 15 U.S.c. § 1064, a mark may be cancelled at any time if the Court

determines that the registration was obtained through fraud.

66. In support of the applications July filed with the USPTO that resulted in the

Website Registration and the Floor Show Registration, July signed oaths in which he alleged under penalty of perjury that he had used the mark OCT A VIUS TOWER in connection with the

services identified in the registration applications since February 4, 1992 and in interstate

commerce in the United States since June 8, 1993.

67. Upon information and belief, July has never used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark

in commerce in the United States for entertainment services in the nature of a website featuring

musical videos or related film clips, as set forth in the Website Registration, or for any of the

services identified in the Floor Show Registration, and July knew the same when he signed the

oaths supporting the applications.

68. Upon information and belief, July has never made bona fide use of the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in commerce in the United States for entertainment services in the

nature of a website featuring musical performances or photographs, as set forth in the Website

Registration, and, to the extent July has offered the services at all, he did not begin offering these

services as of the dates of first use listed in the oath he signed supporting his application, and

July knew the same when he signed the oath supporting the application. Upon information and belief, July alleged dates of first use that he knew to be false to make it appear that his rights are

senior to Caesars'.

69. Upon information and belief, but for July's intentional misrepresentations of

material fact, the USPTO would not have issued either Reg. No. 3,675,168 or Reg. No. 3,736,945 to July, and July made the misrepresentations to the USPTO for the purpose of

- 12 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
"(L
I::E 11
So
~F 12
.K\
~GJ 13
C)_j
-_j
0::0 14
°I
gGj 15
oz
t-o:: 16
~~
(f)'::C 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 inducing the USPTO to issue registrations to him he knew the USPTO would not otherwise

Issue.

70. Caesars has suffered, and continues to suffer, damage as a result of the USPTO's

reliance on July's intentional misrepresentations.

71. July's intentional misrepresentations to the USPTO to obtain the Website

Registration and the Floor Show Registration constitute fraud on the Trademark Office.

Accordingly, this Court should order that the registrations be cancelled pursuant to 15 U.S.c.

§§ 1119.

COUNT VI

Cancellation of July's Nevada Registrations Based on Non-Use or Abandonment

72. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-71

above as if fully set forth herein.

73. A mark may only be registered in Nevada if it is used within the state for the

goods or services identified in a registration application for the mark, and the mark is deemed to

be used in Nevada "[o]n services when it is used or displayed in the sale or advertising of

services and the services are rendered in this State." NEV. REv. STAT. § 600.320.

74. Pursuant to NEV. REv. STAT. § 600.390, "The Secretary of State shall cancel from

the register. .. (3) Any registration concerning which a court of competent jurisdiction finds that:

( a) The registered mark has been abandoned ... [ or] (4) Any registration when a court of

competent jurisdiction orders cancellation of the registration on any ground."

75. Upon information and belief, July has never used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark

in Nevada for entertainment services in the nature of a website featuring musical videos or

related film clips, as set forth in Nevada Reg. Nos. E0360772009-9 and E0360792009-1, or for

any of the services identified in Nevada Reg. No. E0360792009-0. Upon further information

and belief, if July has used the mark for any of these services at any time, he has abandoned use

of the mark.

- 13 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(j)
-0..
I2: 11
~O
~F 12
.K'\
~~ 13
0_J
-_J
0::0 14
°I
Or 15
o::w
oz
r-a:: 16
~~
(j)':£. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 76. Upon information and belief, July has never made bona fide use of the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in Nevada for entertainment services in the nature of a website

featuring musical performances or photographs, as set forth in Nevada Reg. Nos. E0360772009- 9 and E0360792009-1. Rather, any use he has made began only after becoming aware of Caesars' planned use of the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark for hotel services and in an effort to

fabricate legal rights to assert against Caesars. Such use is not bona fide use and does not

support a valid service mark registration in Nevada.

77. Based on the foregoing, Caesars is entitled to an order directing that Nevada

Registration Nos., E0360772009-9, E0360792009-1, and E0495922009-0 be cancelled.

COUNT VII

Cancellation of Nevada Service Mark Registrations Based on Fraud

78. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-77

above as if fully set forth herein.

79. Pursuant to NEV. REv. STAT. § 600.390, "[t]he Secretary of State shall cancel

from the register ... (3) Any registration concerning which a court of competent jurisdiction finds that ... (d) [t]he registration was obtained fraudulently .... [or] (4) Any registration when a court of

competent jurisdiction orders cancellation of the registration on any ground."

80. Pursuant to NEV. REv. STAT. § 600.410 "[a]ny person who for himself or herself,

or on behalf of any other person, attempts to procure or procures the registration of any mark in

this State by knowingly making any false or fraudulent representation or declaration, verbally or

in writing, or by any other fraudulent means, is liable for all damages sustained in consequence

of the registration to any party injured thereby."

81. In support of his applications that resulted in Nevada Reg. Nos. E0360772009-9

and E0360792009-1, July claimed that he had used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in connection

with the services identified in the applications in Nevada since April 6, 2008.

82. In support of his application that resulted in Nevada Reg. No. E0495922009-0,

July claimed that he had used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in connection with the services identified in the application in Nevada since April 6, 2006.

- 14 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
if)
"0..
I::E 11
So
~F 12
.0
~GJ 13
(9_J
-_J
a:O 14
°I
0-',.;" 15
a:w
oz
I--a: 16
~LS
if)::( 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 83. Upon information and belief, July has never used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark

in Nevada for entertainment services in the nature of a website featuring musical videos or

related film clips, as set forth in Nevada Reg. Nos. E0360772009-9 and E 0360792009-1, or for

any of the services identified in Nevada Reg. No. E0495922009-0, and July knew the same when

he signed his applications.

84. Upon information and belief, July has never made bona fide use of the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in Nevada for entertainment services in the nature of a website

featuring musical performances or photographs, as set forth in Nevada Reg. Nos. E0360772009-

9 and E 0360792009-1, and, to the extent July has offered the services at all, he did not begin

offering these services as of the dates of first use listed in his application, and July knew the

same when he submitted his registration applications. Upon information and belief, July alleged

dates of first use that he knew to be false to make it appear that his rights are senior to Caesars'.

85. Upon information and belief, but for July's intentional misrepresentations of

material fact, the Nevada Secretary of State's Office would not have issued the registrations to

him, and July knew the same.

86. Caesars has suffered, and continues to suffer, damage as a result of the the

Nevada Secretary of State's Office's justifiable reliance on July's intentional misrepresentations.

87. July's intentional misrepresentations in connection with his Nevada service mark

applications constitute fraud. Accordingly, this Court should order that Nevada Reg. Nos.

E0360772009-9, E0360792009-1, and E0495922009-0 be cancelled pursuant to NEV. REV. STAT. § 600.390.

COUNT VIII

Cancellation of July's Florida Registration Based on Non-Use or Abandonment

88. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-87

above as if fully set f011h herein.

89. A mark may only be registered in Florida if it is used within the state for the

goods or services identified in a registration application for the mark, and the mark is deemed to

- 15 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
-0..
I 2.: 11
So
~F 12
.KI
(f)
OGJ 13
O_j
-_j
LtO 14
°I
~~ 15
OZ
F-cr: 16

«W
(f)':.C 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 be used in Florida "[o]n services when the mark is used or displayed in the sale or advertising of

services and the services are rendered in this state." FLA. STAT § 495.011(14).

90. Pursuant to FLA. STAT. § 495,101, "[t]he Secretary of State shall cancel from the

register. .. (3) Any registration concerning which a court of competent jurisdiction finds that: (a)

The registered mark has been abandoned ... [ or] (4) When a court of competent jurisdiction shall

order cancellation of a registration on any ground."

91. Upon information and belief, July has never used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark

in Florida for entertainment services, namely, for providing a website featuring musical videos

and related film clips, as set forth in Florida Reg. No. T09,000,000,664. Upon further

information and belief, if July has used the mark for any of these services at any time, he has

abandoned use of the mark in Florida.

92. Upon information and belief, July has never made bona fide use of the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in Florida for entertainment services, namely, a name of a band, or

for providing a website featuring musical performances and related photographs, as set forth in

Florida State Reg. No. T09,000,000,664. Rather, any use he has made began only after he

became aware of Caesars' planned use of the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark for hotel services and

in an effort to fabricate legal rights to assert against Caesars. Such use is not bona fide use and

does not support a valid service mark registration in Florida.

93. Based on the foregoing, Caesars is entitled to an order directing that Florida State

Registration No. T09,000,000,664 be cancelled.

COUNT IX

Cancellation of Florida Service Mark Registration Based on Fraud

94. Caesars incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-93 as if

fully set forth herein.

95. Pursuant to FLA. STAT. § 495,101, "[t]he department shall cancel from the

register: (3) Any registration for which a court of competent jurisdiction finds that: ... (d) [t]he

registration was obtained fraudulently."

- 16 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(f)
"0...
I 2:: 11
So
~F 12
.KS
i2GJ 13
0_J
-_J
0::0 14
°I
o -":. 15
o::w
OZ
f--O:: 16
~l5
(f)':{_ 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 96. Pursuant to FLA. STAT. § 495,121, "[a]ny person who shall for herself or himself,

or on behalf of any other person, procure the filing or registration of any mark with the

Department of State under the provisions hereof, by knowingly making any false or fraudulent

representation or declaration, verbally or in writing, or by any other fraudulent means, shall be

liable to pay all damages sustained in consequence of such filing or registration, and for punitive

or exemplary damages, to be recovered by or on behalf of the party injured thereby in any court

of competent jurisdiction."

97. In support of his applicationsthat resulted in Florida Reg. No. T09,000,000,664,

July claimed that he had used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in connection with the services

identified in the application in Florida since May 10,2008.

98. Upon information and belief, July has never used the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark

in Florida for entertainment services in the nature of a website featuring musical videos or

related film clips, as set forth in Florida Reg. No. T09,000,000,664, and July knew the same

when he signed the oath supporting his application.

99. Upon information and belief, July has never made bona fide use of the

OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in Florida for entertainment services in the nature of a band or a

website featuring musical performances or photographs, as set forth in Florida State Reg. No.

T09,000,000,664, and, to the extent July has offered the services at all, he did not begin offering

these services as of the date of first use listed in the oath he signed supporting his application,

and July knew the same when he signed the oath supporting the application. Upon information

and belief, July alleged a date of first use that he knew to be false to make it appear that his rights

are senior to Caesars'.

100. Upon information and belief, but for July's intentional misrepresentations of

material fact, the Florida Department of State would not have issued the registration to him, and

July knew the same.

101. Caesars has suffered, and continues to suffer, damage as a result of the Florida

,

Department of State's reliance on July's intentional misrepresentations.

- 17 -

04089-001720538.doc

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(j)
"n...
I:;E 11
::30
~F 12
.>6
~GJ 13
(5_J
-_J
0::0 14
°I
~.t; 15
OZ
F-O:: 16
~L:J
(j),:£ 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 102. July's intentional misrepresentation in connection with his Florida service mark

application constitutes fraud. Accordingly, Caesars is entitled to an order directing that Florida

Reg. No. T09,000,000,664 be cancelled.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that the Court:

(a) Declare that Caesars' use of the mark OCTAVIUS TOWER for hotel services

does not infringe, and at all times has not infringed, any rights Defendants own or

claim to own under the federal Lanham Act or the laws of the states of Nevada or

Florida in the OCTAVIUS TOWER service mark, trade name, or domain name;

(b) Permanently enjoin Defendants and all those in active concert or participation

with them from claiming, to Caesars or any third party, that Caesars' use of the

OCTAVIUS TOWER .mark for hotel services infringes any rights Defendants

own, if any, in the OCTAVIUS TOWER service mark, trade name or domain "

name;

(c) Order that U.S. Reg. Nos. 3,675,168 and 3,736,945 be cancelled and direct the

Clerk of Court to transmit notice of the Order to the Director of the Trademark

Office of the USPTO;.

(d) Order that Nevada Reg. Nos. E0360772009-9, E0360792009-1, and

E0495922009-0 be cancelled and direct the Clerk of Court to transmit notice of

the Order to the Nevada Secretary of State's Office;

(e) Order that Florida State Reg. No. T09,000,000,664 be cancelled and direct the

Clerk of Court to transmit notice of the Order to the Florida Department of State;

(f) Award Caesars recovery of the reasonable costs and attorneys' fees it incurs in

connection with this matter; and

III III III

- 18 -

04089-001720538.doc

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
z
0 10
(j)
'0..
I2: 11
~O
~F 12
.KS
~G:J 13
O....J
-....J
0::0 14
°I
~~. 15
oz
r:-o:: 16

«W
(j))L 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 (g) Award Caesars such other, further and additional relief as the Court deems just

and proper.

DATED this 8th day of April, 2011.

04089-00/720538.doc

SANTORO, DRIGGS, WALCH, KEARNEY, HOLLEY & THOMPSON

Nevada Bar No. 00532 I JAMES D. BOYLE, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 08384

400 South Fourth Street, Third Floor Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

David Stewart, Esq. Georgia Bar. No. 681149 Nadya Munasifi, Esq. Georgia Bar No. 156051

Pro Hac Vice Applications Forthcoming

Attorneys for Caesars World, Inc.

- 19 -

EXHIBIT A

00 4-< o

1.1- o

C o II) c ro 0..

>< W

C o

CO

...-4 -tIT ~

II) Q) U c

:::s II) o ro COl c Q)

«>

..... (J} C 10 Q)...J

E c

c·-

'ro @ ~Q) Q)U ..... ro c-

w~

.. l/) (J} ..eLrn ro L- (J} L- Q)

10 10 IU

~I

~I

o - M

....

o

N o ....

o

- +

00 o o

~ ~

-

fA ea ~...J

""c

II .-

fA@) CD CD U U c ea :sO ea cc..

c ~

«ea

cl=

CDeaca

EO CD C"->

.- 0

ea c 1::=0

CD._

....... fA C C

W ea

fAC.

:can ~ e

.... 0

ea ._

~=

.-

m

~ c CD

E

c

~

!

c w en

:c ~

..

CII :I:

(/) ....

<l> m

..e<l> .... <1:1

,!aU c <l> o:S '(;)c 0 ro .... a.<l>

~ E

o

Q) U u ...... ro (/)

m ~

Il...c

(/)'5

,,_ 0

m (/)

?6 <l> u:S

00 o o

~ ::t

00 o

~

.......

!

0..

'+-

o

c: o ~ ro o o

~

"0 c: ro

c: o 'Ci) c:

CO 0.. X Q)

'E

ro

c..

~

'i::

1:5

Q)

Q)

"§ c ~

OJ c:

:0

::s '0 c:

2

!;::;

~

Q)

>

e

0..

E

00 4... o

'n q)

1

(1)

£;

Cl C _g (0

"0 C (0

C o '.i=i

:.0 -0 (0

C o :.;::; c

%!

c

8

(].) £;

m

c

~

m c..

~ ~

'§: 16

o a::

o ,_; Cl(1) c'E

'E .8

~~

Cl(1) co. o e mo.

w£ (1) :::J c: 0 =w

.....

(1)

~

E 2

o u,

2:'

o

l

N (1) ..c: ......

-

o

(jj

-0 o

E ~

I... (1) (1) ......

3:..ill o 0. I- E

E 8 2 (1) o..c: u..1-

,!!1

> o

E U> £;

-

o

5l

(0

U>

~

(1) £;

~

m

c

5: o c .:.::

>.

(jj

-0

'§:

(1) E ~ ~

•• ••

-0 C (0

o o Ii)

0)-

-

Cf) (1) Cf) :::J o £;

c (1) 0.

o

~

Cl ,5

ro

(1)

':::I:::

c

(0 _

E (1) ~ E

(1) (0

Ill::

00 <::> o

r::.! ::t

......

~

co

co a..

til "co ,til

ClJ co U

ClJ U co

co c,

til "co til (])

co U

00 t....., o

00

00 o o

~

__.

EXHIBITB

-a
CP
.. U)
wi en w
.-
« - ~
LLI ~ ...
CC $
% "
LLI 0 Z 'i
1::0 - "
c CP Z 'I: ... E
.a W 0 0 w 8
...I ~ :::I I-
.- ell ~ '"
~ CC .... >t "CI iii <0
CP C 'j EO>
0 CC c " .. m o~ E
"
U z:. ~ til ell .c W = 0", <1)0
a. iii: · "00
S . ~ · "'<0
.. U) E E (1)-, 00
LLI 0 .c~"CJ IX · 010 c c
0 " '& ,; · ~ .S: iii·",
f- .. 0 C ~ E
z:. It:: u ti >- " 0 Z C · 8 (IJ<I)Q1 <1)",
loot Cl c .c :::II (1)<'G-o UU
U tn. .. .. en 0 0 : >- .,; EuiE....JUuidl"O'O~
0 :I ._ .. .e
o ... "CI : Z ~ t II :::I 8 gc"OtIl cc::
1::01 .- 0 ,m .- c:: 01 -q ~ ~ 0
~ A. .. ell :::II : 0 0 EOOl O«dlt '"
ill LLI LL. >t B;g,i~ o .. .t:I ~ ocdlt::c->ooo'-
CI = :: OOii~~(I)*(IJ"'(lJI/)~
~ 0 $ ~ m rodl(1lQ)
Z III cS"CljDo rti~ u 5Jj&uJ:...Ja::o::o::£
ofJ CP I- eI) 1: ,as! 0 ._ :::I :::I II :::!§§§~_Q.§.§.§_Q.§
., $ U ell ~ W ~ = 0 .c I===Q)Q)Q)(1l(1lQ)<I)
- U
> .. :::I.. Do .S! >- u-5-5-5-£-5-£-5-5-5£
w .- W :::11(,)41 I- 'Iii
en " i wwwwwwwwwww
:E til ~ i Z :::I ~~IliiiiiiI
.a It:: ._
-I ct. " ,!!! S ; II
Zj ~ :) c .c
til e 0 :I l-
I 41 Z
- D::i ... dIo :z: 0
III >-
:r: ~l ::» 0
Oi tn a.
><
>: .- LL. IU
z:.
... -

>IOI~ ~

z ct :1:1 W

s

o

::c:

E

iii

a

...

j:; z

~

a::

o . II. r 1-:; o 11'1 Z IU GI ..

tv .2.

11'1 =

GI ~

E .II:

IU II:

Z IU C .c 'i lE

o

Q

GI

.c

..

z <CI ~ WI

...,
co Q)
~ C
M •
...,
co Q)
I C
~O ..
-M Q)
:::s It) .-
~ I .,
_co c
Q) N e
uCft ~
.. .-.
ca 'P
:E 0 -
0 :::s
•• + ....
to- E
u -
•• ••
C II ..... E
to- Z - .c;
z 0 c ......
:E 0
0 :z: 0
I gjl
U A. au
OJ)
Q)
0:>1
VJ
t':i
--;;1
0
-
Q)
...c:
o
~
0
o
~
Q)
g
1;)
::s
.....
~

Q) j
--
a g-
o
::r:: ...:;;I I
,I
I
I I
I ,
1 I
L I I!- I
~ C I

I I

I

-

en

.-

J:

I-

-

-

'j

= E

1'1 .. ,; Z 1'1 C

c 5 g '~ GI ... CI ! 1:

Q ~::

m 1'1 ~ ,5 ::I ::I ~ m CI .S! >0

:e

GI .c I-

>1 0 :::»1 ~I

· ·

· ·

.:;

g

z CCI ~I wi

~I 0; ::::)1 ..II 01

%: WI ~I w _.

••

-

ca

In

w ~ cc

~

III

;:

o

... _. en

w Z G» CJ 0 E CC 0 ca ..JtI)Z

~ C) .5

en Z ca ~ i E CC 0 0 cnCJQ

III '"

CC .5

u ~

~ -

G» -

C ~

G» CI)

.c ~ I- ...

>IO.JI~I

iii

~

t; z

~

iii:

o .

II. g'

I- ._

oi

Z IU QI ..

;; .e

III ::I

II g,

E ~ lIS c:

Z lIS c: .c 'Ii lE

o

Ci

Go!

.c:

..

(f) 0:::

W LL LL

a ..J ..J -4:

C) z

i2 m

Z 11(' ~ w

u 0 J,...I 01

o o

~

a

o

::c:

L

"
"
I I
.:
I
I I
,
I
I
'-- " ~

..

en

.-

-

U)

w

:E

cc

Z

Zw C..I 2cC oU)

cD:: a.0 oIL.

I-!! W

D::

:)

I-

:t

IL.

~

-

~

.a

~ .c ..

.e ..

.-

~

~ ..

.-

en

.a ~

~

en

I-

.e

I-

>IO=»ID::

· · ·

· ·

·

,.J.

~

.II:

U GI .c u ... III

.!

Z <C1~IW

~I 0: :JI ...II 01

t:aIW!

••

G)

-

CI

en

>IOI::»!~

21 <l:1~; WI

en 0:: w LL LL

o ....J ....J

« (!) z

0::

OJ

UIOI::» .JIC

o o

ral WI

r-
0
'<::t 0
4-< ~
0 0
'<::t ~
~ .0\
~
p., ..

CO C» ~ C (If) ... CO C»

~ Q E - (If) ~

~ In .-

"'«»1: - N 0 3 en ..

:v;-i

::to-

° .! ~.t.E

U .. ..

CCw .... I-ZzoCC

oz=F UA.IU

%1 WI ~I WI -·1

I-

.e ...

>101=»10::

· · · ·

·

,.;

:::I o

~ .:.: u III iI:

U .. III :::I

....

ZI <C ~ wI

~I OJ =»1 ..I [ 01

~IW

w ..

a: .! c ca

In

~ ..

w .e

~ ! o ca

~ ... en

w Z CI) U 0 E Co'" ..Jenz

C ,ft C

A. z Iii

en - E a::IE .

COo cnUQ W =

(J .j

~ ~

C .e

CI) m

.c .c

~ ~

>IOI~:~

tJ) 0::

W LL LL

o ...J ...J

« o z

ii m

zl CCI ~ 1111

u 01 ~..J 01

["--. o o N

--

o

~

o o

EXHIBIT C

NATIONAL ARBITRATION

FORUM

NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM

DECISION

Caesars World, Inc. v. Marcel July Ra Christian Kaldenhoff clo mar-motorcycle replacement airshields GmbH

Claim Number: F A080 1001126341

I>ARTIES

Complainant is Caesars World, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Jessica E. Jacob of Alston & Bird, LLP, of Georgia, USA. Respondent is Marcel July Ra Christian Kaldenhoff, clo mar-motorcycle replacement airshields GmbH ("Respondent"), of Germany.

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES

The domain names at issue are <caesarstower.com>, <caesarstowers.corn>, <caesarspalacetower.com>, <caesarspalacetowers.com>, and <caesarspalacctowcrslasvcgas.com>, registered with Cronon Ag Berlin, Niederlassung Rcgensburg

I)ANIUJ

The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and that to the best of her knowledge she has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson sits as Panelist.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically January 4, 2008; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint January 7, 2008.

On January 18, 2008, Cronon Ag Berlin, Niederlassung Regensburg confirmed bye-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <caesarstowcr.com>, <cacsarstowers.com>, <caesarspalacetower.com>, <caesarspalacetowers.com> and <caesarspa)acetowers)asvegas.com> domain names are registered with Cronon Ag Berlin, Niederlassung Regensburg and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. Cronon Ag Berlin, Niederlassung Regensburg verified that Respondent is bound by the Cronon Ag Berlin, Niederlassung Regensburg registration agreement and thereby has agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").

On January 23, 2008, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of February 12,2008, by which Respondent could file a response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to

postmaster@caesarstower.com, postmaster@caesarstowers.com, postmaster@caesarspalacetower.com, po stmaster@caesarspalacetowers.com and postmaster@caesarspalacetowerslasvegas.com bye-mail.

Having received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

On February 18, 2008, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson to sit as Panelist.

Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the National Arbitration Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent. 11 Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the National Arbitration Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant makes the following assertions:

1. The disputed domain names that Respondent registered, <caesarstowcr.com>, <caesarstowers.corn>, <caesarspalacetower.com>, <caesarspalacetowers.com> and <caesarspalacetowcrslasvcgas.com>, are confusingly similar to Complainant's CAESARS or CAESARS PALACE marks.

2. Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the <caesarstower.corn>, <caesarstowcrs.com>, <caesarspalacetower.com>, <caesarspalacetowers.com> and <cacsarspalacetowcrslasvegas.com> domain names.

3. Respondent registered and used the <caesarstower.com>, <caesarstowers.com>, <caesarspalacetower .com>,

<caesa rs pala cetow ers. co m> and <caes a rs p ala cetow ers lasvegas. co m> domain names in bad faith.

B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

FINDINGS

Complainant, Caesars World, Inc., owns and operates a casino hotel in Las Vegas, NV under its CAESARS PALACE mark. In addition, Complainant operates casino hotels in Atlantic City, NJ, and Elizabeth, IN, under its CAESARS marie Complainant first registered its CAESARS PALACE mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") on February 9, 1971 (Reg. No. 907,693). Complainant registered its CAESARS mark with the European Union Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market ("OHIM") on October 21, 2004 (Reg. No. 3,198,009).

Respondent registered the disputed domain names July 20, 2007, the day following Complainant's press release regarding plans for a one billion dollar expansion of Caesars Palace in Las Vegas. This press release included the building of a new tower to be named Octavius Tower. Respondent is using the disputed domain names to redirect Internet users attempting to find Complainant's sites to a website located at the <carrybyowner.com> domain name, which purports to allow individuals to buy and sell real estate, automobiles, recreational vehicles, boats and yachts, livestock and other merchandise.

DISCUSSION

Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable. II

Given Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and will draw such inferences as the Panel considers appropriate, pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc. v. webnet-marketing, inc., FA 95095 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 31,2000) (holding that the respondent's failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see also Talk City, Inc. v. Robertson, 02000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) ("In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint. ").

Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires Complainant to prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:

(l) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and

(2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

Identical to and/or Confusingly Similar

Complainant established rights in the CAESARS PALACE and CAESARS marks through Complainant's many registrations with the USPTO and OHIM. The Panel finds the registrations sufficient to satisfy Policy,r 4(a)(i). See Expedia, Inc. v. Tan, FA

99] 075 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 29,2007) ("As the [complainant's] mark is registered with the USPTO, [the] complainant has met the requirements of Policy ,r 4(a)(i)."); see also Trip Network Inc. v. Alviera, FA 9] 4943 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 27, 2007) (finding that the complainant's federal trademark registrations for the CHEAPTICKETS and CHEAPTICKETS.COM marks were adequate to establish its rights in the mark pursuant to policy,r 4(a)(i».

Complainant contends that Respondent's disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant's CAESARS marie. Complainant contends that the disputed domain names, <caesarstower .com>, <caesarstowers.com>, <caesarspalacetower.com>, <caesarspalacetowers.com> and <caesarspalacetowcrs)asvegas,com>, include the entirety of Complainant's mark, merely adding generic terms which directly relate to Complainant's business and the generic top-level domain ("gTLD") ".com." The Panel finds these alterations to an otherwise unchanged mark to be minor and insufficient to distinguish the disputed domain names from Complainant's mark in any meaningful way for the purposes of Policy ~ 4(a)(i). See Am. Int 'I Group, Inc. v. Ling Shun Shing, FA 206399 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 15,2003) (finding that the addition of the term "assurance," to the complainant's AIG mark failed to sufficiently differentiate the name from the mark under Policy '14(a)(i) because the appended term related directly to the complainant's business); see also Space Imaging LLC v. Brownell, AF-0298 (eResolution Sept. 22, 2000) (finding confusing similarity where the respondent's domain name combines the complainant's mark with a generic term that has an obvious relationship to the complainant's business); see also Trip Network Inc. v. Alviera , FA 914943 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 27,2007) (concluding that the addition ofa gTLD, whether it be ".com," ".net," ".biz," or ".org," is irrelevant to a Policy '14(a)(i) analysis). The Panel agrees.

The Panel finds that Complainant satisfied Policy ,r 4(a)(i).

Rights to or Legitimate Intcrests

Where Complainant makes a primafacie case under Policy ~ 4(a)(ii), the burden shifts to Respondent to set forth concrete evidence that it does possess rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. The Panel finds that Complainant established a primafacie case in the matter at hand. See Do The Hustle, LLC v. Tropic Web, D2000- 0624 (WIPO Aug. 21, 2000) (holding that, where the complainant has asserted that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the domain name, it is incumbent on the respondent to come forward with concrete evidence rebutting this assertion because this information is "uniquely within the knowledge and control of the respondent"); see also Clerical Med. Inv. Group Ltd. v. Clericalmedical. com, D2000-

] 228 (WIPO Nov. 28, 2000) (finding that, under certain circumstances, the mere assertion by the complainant that the respondent has no right or legitimate interest is

sufficient to shift the burden of proof to the respondent to demonstrate that such a right or legitimate interest does exist).

Respondent failed to submit a response to the Complaint. Therefore, the Panel is entitled to presume that Respondent lacks all rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. See G. D. Searle v. Martin Mktg., FA 1 18277 (Nat. Arb. Forum Oct. 1, 2002) ("Respondent's failure to respond means that Respondent has not presented any circumstances that would promote its rights or legitimate interests in the subject domain name under Policy ~ 4(a)(ii)."); see also Am. Express Co. v. Fang Suhendro, FA 129120 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 30,2002) ("[B]ased on Respondent's failure to respond, it is presumed that Respondent lacks all rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.").

However, this Panel examines the record to determine if Respondent has any rights or legitimate interests in any of the disputed domain names pursuant to Policy ~ 4( c).

The disputed domain names currently resolve to a website that purports to allow individuals to buy and sell real estate, automobiles, recreational vehicles, boats and yachts, livestock and other merchandise. The Panel finds that this is not a bonafide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy '1 4( c )(i), and it is not a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ~ 4( c )(iii). See Jerry Damson, Inc. v. Tex. Int'l Prop. Assocs., FA 916991 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 10,2007) (concluding that the use of a confusingly similar domain name to operate a portal with hyperlinks to various thirdparty websites, some of which may be in direct competition with a complainant, does not constitute a bonafide offering of goods or services under Policy ~ 4( c )(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair usc under Policy '14(c)(iii); see also Bank ofAm. Corp. v. Nw. Free Only. Access, FA 180704 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 30, 2003) ("Respondent1s demonstrated intent to divert Internet users seeking Complainant's website to a website of Respondent and for Respondent's benefit is not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy j' 4(c)(i) and it is not a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy j 4( c )(iii).").

Complainant contends that Respondent is not commonly known by any of the disputed domain names and is not authorized to use Complainant's CAESARS or CAESARS PALACE marks in any way. Nowhere in Respondent's WI-lOIS information or elsewhere in the record does it indicate that Respondent is or ever was commonly known by any of the disputed domain names. Absent evidence suggesting otherwise, the Panel finds that Respondent has not established fights to or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names in accordance with Policy '14(c)(ii). See Indy Mac Bank FS.B. v, Eshback, FA 830934 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 7, 2006) (finding that the respondent failed to establish rights and legitimate interests in the <emitmortgage.com> domain name as the respondent was not authorized to register domain names featuring the complainant's mark and failed to submit evidence of that it is commonly known by the disputed domain name); see also Braun C0l1J. v. Loney, FA 699652 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 7, 2006) (concluding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain names

where the WHOIS information, as well as all other information in the record, provided no indication that the respondent was commonly known by the disputed domain names, and the complainant had not authorized the respondent to register a domain name containing its registered mark).

The Panel concludes that Complainant satisfied Policy ,r 4(a)(ii).

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

Complainant contends that Respondent has engaged in conduct constituting bad faith registration and use by registering and using the disputed domain names for Respondent's own commercial gain. Internet users searching for Complainant's CAESARS mark would easily be confused by the disputed domain names, which result in additional traffic to Respondent's websites. The Panel finds such confusion for commercial gain to be further evidence of Respondent's bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy S 4(b)(iv). See I-J-D Michigan, Inc. v. Petersons Auto., FA 135608 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 8,2003) (finding that the disputed domain name was registered and used in bad faith pursuant to Policy '14(b)(iv) through the respondent's registration and use of the infringing domain name to intentionally attempt to attract Internet users to its fraudulent website by using the complainant's famous marks and likeness); see also Allianz ofAm. Corp. v. Bond, FA 680624 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 2, 2006) (finding bad faith registration and use under Policy '14(b)(iv) where the respondent was diverting Internet users searching for the complainant to its own website and likely profiting from click-through tees).

Complainant also contends that Respondent's registration of the disputed domain names one day following a widely published press release regarding the construction of a new tower for Complainant's Las Vegas hotel and casino indicates Respondent has acted in bad faith. The Panel agrees and finds Respondent's opportunistic action as further evidence to support a finding of bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ~r 4(a)(iii). See Sola v. Waldron, 02001-035] (WIPO June 18,2001) (finding that the respondent's registration of the <seveballesterostrophy.com> domain name at the time of the announcement of the Seve Ballesteros Trophy golf tournament "strongly indicates an opportunistic registration"); see also Pavillion Agency, Inc. v. Greenhouse Agency Ltd., D2000-1221 (WIPO Dec. 4, 2000) (finding that the "domain names are so obviously connected with the Complainants that the use or registration by anyone other than Complainants suggests 'opportunistic bad faith''').

The Panel finds that Complainant satisfied Policy ~ 4(a)(iii).

DECISION

Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <caesarstower.com>, <caesarstowcrs.com>, <caesarspalacetower.com>, <caesarspalacetowers.com> and <caesarspalacetowerslasvcgas.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

ARBITRATOR

Hon, Carolyn Marks Johnson, Panelist Dated: March 3, 2008.

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Horne Page

NATIONAL ARBITRATION :FORUM

'"
w
'" ~
H
0 ~ :>
1Il
'"0 Q ..,
~ r;J :. 0
s 1Il
Q " ~, ;:J
0 f.t! v u ;.'.
fi; Q "'" ..c1 8'
0.
~ £3 -..,...{ i
~ ::l ~~ "
'tJ III !U :;.'
.,.,
ill !::: ;';
:t: "" <If:
Po. ,., U ..,
~ I./l ., Q/

£

" s:

I"

EXHIBITD

PRIBILLA KALDENHOFF NEGM

RECHTSANWAL TE

ANWALTSKANZLEI. GOSENSTRASSE:). 50872 KOLN

DR. JUR. HANS PR!BILLA II 119-'0019(15) CHRISTIAN KALDENHOFF

SAMI NEGM·AWAD

AMIN NEGM-AWAD

rei: 0221/515263

Tel.: 0221 J 8606060

Fax: 0221 I 5101145

Email: c.kaldenlloH@prikalneg.de

http: www.PriKaINeg.de

LG . Faeh: K 1551

Mr. Tim Donovan

Senior Vice President & General Counsel Caesers World, Inc.

One Caesers Palace Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89109 U. S. A.

Unser Zeichen: 43/11 KC

Octavius Tower - Marcel July . Trademark Infringement

Datum:

08.03.2011

Dear Mr. Donovan,

Our law office has been retained by Mr. Marcel July, the owner of the Federal Registration for

. the name "Octavius Tower" under registration # 3,675,168, together with a State of Nevada Trademark for "Octavius Tower" under certificate # C20090630-0720, and a Service Mark for "Octavius Tower" under certificate # C20090909·1592, as well as a State of Nevada limited liability Company, "Octavius Tower, LLC", and finally, the Internet Domain Name, "Octavius Tower.corn".

1t has come to our client's attention that the initial Trademark application for the Trademark "Octavius Tower", wruch you filed with the USPTO has expired, and further, that the new application filed with the USPTO on December 14, 2010 was denied on February 24, 2011. The reason for the denial was "Likelihood of Confusion". Of course, our client agrees with the USPTO's conclusion.

Therefore, we are sending this correspondence to demand that you cease and desist using our client's Trademarked name "Octavius Tower" in any manner whatsoever, including, but not limited to, "cyber squatting" (use of this trademark on the Internet) billboard signs, print or

SPARKASSE KOLNBONN BLZ 370501 98 KTO.·NR. 2212280' POSTSANK K6LN BLl 370100 50 KTO.·NR. 401580·507

- 2 -

broadcast ads, brochures, and any and all other forms of displaying this Trademarked name. Failure to do so immediately will result in our cHent pursuing all legal remedies available to him.

Also, our cllent reports to have received a phone call (he recalls that it was approximately in 2008) from an attorney in Reno, Nevada, purporting to represent your firm and making threats to our client if he did not sell the domain name "OctaviusTower.com" to your firm. Please send all future communication regarding this matter to our office and to our attention.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact us at the above contact information.

z ~
.,J
0 (/)
~ c:
(\I ::;':I
t- O
'"
0 0
U,
<'> co
llJ .....
ia Q)
(j) c
.;( Q)
0: Q)(1}
I- o .2: 0
«a
z <>6 .._ "..-
w O(1}
ro ...., Q)CO
.0 C
<!l 0) <..5 o ru
Ul -0 Cro-o
.,J c '05 - CO ru
N roO) ~o...>
z > .... "0 0)
;? g£Lo~Z
(f) OQ)s:Q)u5'
f-
-' O~ ~ru
-<
~ E5~ruO)<i
z ._ 0 Q) 0 ~
.;( I-._ ~ Q) u:i
...:airoc~ .
2: (f) 0 0 ...J ::> EXHIBITE

ALsTON&BrRD LLP

One Atlantic Center '1201 West Peachlre(~ Street Atlanta, Coorgia 30309<1424

404-8!n -7000 Fax: 404-881-7777 www.alsron.com

David J. Stewart

Direct Dial: iUl4-881-7952

Ii-maib david.stewartepalston.com

March 21, 2011

FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY INADMIS~\'JBLE PURSUANT TO F.R.E. 408

Via E-Mail (c,kaldenlu~ff@pl'ikalnegde) / International UPS Christian Kaldenhoff, Esq.

Pribilla KaldenhoffNegnl

Goebenstrasse 3

50672 Cologne Or::RMANY

Re: OCTAVIUS TOWE'R

Dear Mr. Kaldenhoff

This finn represents Caesars World, Inc. in connection with trademark matters. We arc in receipt of your letters to Gary Lovernan and Tim Donovan dated March 8, 2011 and respond thereto.

We disagree with your client's assertion that there is a likelihood of confusion between your client's use of OCTAVIUS TOWER for entertainment services and Caesars' use of OCTAVIUS 'rOWER for hotel services. We believe there is a clear distinction between these services in the minds of consumers and that confusion is substantially unlikely. The fact {hat our client's mark is used and will continue to be used only in connection with its famous CAESARS PALACE mark further renders any possibility of consumer confusion remote.

You arc correct that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") has issued an initial office action in which it has refused registration of Caesars' application for OCTAVIUS TOWER on the grounds of likelihood of confusion with your client's Registration No. 3,736,945. However, we believe our client will have little difficulty overcoming this refusal and securing registration of its mark. Objective support for this belief can be found in the fact that the USPTO found no likelihood of confusion between the parties' marks when your client filed his registration application, notwithstanding the pendency of Caesars' prior application for OCTAVIUS TOWER. We also note that the USPTO has twice found that there is no likelihood of confusion between your client's website services and Caesars' hotel services.

_____ ,, __ ,, __ , __ ". __ •• '_,,~_ •• _, , "'_"_~~~~_~_ •• """"""_'OC'''' __ '_'''''··_·'_''·"'_'~ ~ __

Allanti\' Charlotte I Di\lIn,;. Los Angeles· N8W York' Research Triangle. Silicon V'llle)'· Ventura County> Washington, nc.

Christian Kaldenhoff, Esq. March 21, 2011

Page 2

Based on the foregoing, Caesars believes that the parties can peacefully co-exist without confusion. We therefore request that your client withdraw his demands and consent in writing to Caesars' registration and use of its mark.

lfyour client refuses to do so, Caesars will be left with no option but to take such legal action as it deems appropriate to protect its valuable rights. Our client announced the opening of its Octavius Tower nearly four years ago. In that time period, the name has achieved significant notoriety, as you will see by running a search in Google on "Octavius Tower." Your client is aware of the publicity our client's tower has received because he posted a C0111111ent on the Las Vegas Sun website following an article about our client's tower (sec attached).

Octavius Tower opened nearly a year ago with the launch ofthree luxury suites.

Under well established U.S. legal authority, our client has developed trademark rights and rights analogous to trademark rights that give our client a protcctable interest in its mark dating back to 2007.

We can find no evidence that your client made any use of the OCTAVIUS TOWER mark in the United States prior to om client's acquisition of rights in its mark. Indeed, Mr. July admitted to my colleague Jessica Lewis (then Jessica Jacob) in an email dated September 2 J , 2007 that he was not using his Octavius Tower domain names in. the United States at the time. Only in 2008 or later did he post the content that is currently located at <octaviustower.corn> ~~ a fact we can establish through dated website printouts.

Your client claims to have used his mark in connection with a heavy metal band, but we can find no evidence that this band is still in existence or that it performed in the United States prior to our client's announcement of the building of its Octavius Tower. The specimen Mr. July submitted in connection with his trademark registration application is for a concert in Germany and therefore docs not demonstrate his ownership of any rights in the United States (or properly support his U.S. registration). Based on the foregoing, we believe we will establish that our client has established senior rights in its marie

We also believe that, if it proves necessary to do so, we can cancel your client's U.S. trademark registrations for fraud on the USPTO. It is clear that your client did not use his mark to identify the services identified in Reg. No. 3,675,168 as of the dates listed in his registration, and he has previously admitted the same. With regard to Reg. No. 3,736,945, your client has not used the mark in connection with most of the services identified in the registration (including news and comedy shows and floor shows), or for the time periods identified, His sworn oath to the contrary constitutes clear fraud.

Your client's actions in connection with domain names he registered after our client's announcement of its tower further evidences fraud on his part. As you know, your client registered numerous Caesars and Octavius Tower domain names two days after Caesars announced its plans to open its new tower. This was hardly coincidental, and a

Christian Kaldcnhoff, Esq. March 21,2011

Page 3

lJDRP panelist found that your client's registration of various Caesars formative domain names was "opportunistic action" undertaken in bad faith. Caesars World, Inc. v.Marcel '!UZy Ra Christian Kaldcl1hqlf; Nat' I Arb. Forum, FA 0801001126341 (March 3, 20(8).

All usc your client has made of his Octavius 'rower domain names and mark since that time is clearly designed to give the appearance of senior rights to Caesars in an effort to trump up a claim for trademark infringement against Caesars. Although Caesars is willing to co-exist with your client in the United States for the services he is offering, Caesars is not willing to allow its valuable trademark rights to be threatened.

It is Caesars' sincere hope that this matter can be resolved amicably. 'To do so, we must receive your client's confirmation by March 31, 2011, that he is willing to enter into an appropriate co-existence agreement. This agreement would provide that Mr. July consents to Caesars' registration and usc of its OCTAVIUS TOWER mark for hotel services and that Caesars consents to Mr. July's usc and registration of OCTA VIUS TOWER for the services identified in his current U.S. registrations. The parties would reserve all rights with regard to any other uses. Each party would also release the claims they have against one another tor actions prior to the agreement date. If Mr. July is agreeable to such an arrangement, we will prepare a draft co-existence agreement for your review,

Finally, your letter notes that a lawyer Irorn Reno, Nevada previously contacted your client and made certain demands on Caesars' behalf. Caesars has never had a lawyer from Reno involved in this matter.

Please direct all future correspondence regarding this matter to my attention. r look forward to hearing from you and remain hopeful that this matter can be resolved quickly and amicably.

cc: Nadya Munasifi, Esq. (Alston & Bird Ll.P)

LFG/\J.D7./3252 J 1j()3v I

Attachment

'"
w
'" ~
H
0 ~ :>
1Il
'"0 Q ..,
~ r;J :. 0
s 1Il
Q " ~, ;:J
0 f.t! v u ;.'.
fi; Q "'" ..c1 8'
0.
~ £3 -..,...{ i
~ ::l ~~ "
'tJ III !U :;.'
.,.,
ill !::: ;';
:t: "" <If:
Po. ,., U ..,
~ I./l ., Q/

£

" s:

I"

EXHIBITF

PRIBILLA KALDENHOFF NEGM

RECHTSANWALTE

ANW AL TSKANZLEI . GllBENSTRASSE 3 - 50672 KllLN

DR. JUR. HANS PRIBILLA " (1940·1995) CHRISTIAN KALDENHOFF

SAMI NEGM-AWAD

AMIN NEGM-AWAD

Tel.: 0221/515263

Tel.: 0221 18606060

Fax: 0221/5101145

Email: c.kaldenhoff@prikalneg.de

http: www.PriKaINeg.de

LG· Fach: K 1551

David J. Stewart Alston & Berg, LLP 1 Atlantic Center

1201 W. Peachtree St. Atlanta, GA 30309~3424 U.S.A

Unser Zeichen: 43/11 Ke06

Re: Ocavius Tower

Datum:

23.03.2011

Dear Mr. Stewart,

We are in receipt of your letter dated March 21, 2011. We hereby reject all of the claims and allegations contained therein. We stand ready to defend our client's lawfully obtained Trademarks issued by the United Stated Patent and Trademark Office.

At this time we have no interest in your proposed "Co-Existence" Agreement. Our client is the lawful owner of the Federal registrations outlined in your letter, and therefore, we demand, once again, that you Cease and Desist the use of our client's Trademark name in any manner whatsoever. Failure to do so will result in our client taking all legal actions deemed appropriate to protect his Trademarks.

cc: Gary Loveman Tim Donovan David Sonderman Leon Black

SPARKASSE KOLNBONN BLZ 370 50198 KTO.-NR. 2 212 280' POSTBANK KOLN BLZ 370 100 50 KTO.-NR. 401580-507

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful