Honey Badger Don't Care Trademark Copyright Complaint PDF

1
Daniel L. Reback (SBN 239884)

Email: dreback@kranesmith.com
2
3
Jeremy Smith (SBN 242430)
CO
Email: j smith@kranesmith.com
Benjamin J. Smith (SBN 266712)
-<
3C
Email: bsmith@Jcranesmith.com
4
5
6
CD >-* ""
KRANE & SMITH, APC

16255 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 600
Encino, CA 91436
Tel: (818) 382-4000
kcnr-f/>
Fax:(818)382-4001
<// o
O
*;
oo
Ol CO
II
CD
v>
en
Attorneys for Plaintiff,

CHRISTOPHER GORDON
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
CHRISTOPHER GORDON, an
individual,
Plaintiff,
1. TRADEMARK
14
INFRINGEMENT [15 U.S.C.

1114 et sea.]:
vs.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
nM^899 6 &
COMPLAINT FOR:
13
THREAD PIT, INC., a corporation;
2. TRADEMARK
and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive,
INFRINGEMENT [California law];

3. TRADEMARK DILUTION [15
U.S.CJ 1125(c)]:
Defendants.
4. FEDERAL UNFAIR
COMPETITION AND FALSE
DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN [15

U.S.C. 61125(a)]:
5. UNFAfR COMPETITION
[California law]; and

6. COPYRIGHTINFRINGEMENT
[17 U.S.C. 501]

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
.23
UiwivjiiiAL
r:
n
--
>
"1
1
2
Plaintiff CHRISTOPHER GOILDON ("Plaintiff) alleges as follows:

INTRODUCTION
yvho, on January 18, 2011, published a video
Plaintiff is a comedic narrator
on YouTube that consisted of his ori
traits of a honey badger. The video vfent "viral" and has generated more than W
million views on YouTube. In the
"HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE,' among others. Plaintiffs original expression
has gained a tremendous amount of nbtoriety, and his expression has been referred
to in commercials, television shows, magazines, and throughout the internet, and
inal narration humorously describing the
video, Plaintiffs original expression and joke is
10
by numerous celebrities. Plaintiffcoj)yriighted his narration, and also trademarked
11
"HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE"
12
various classes of goods, including t- shirts. Plaintiff has produced, advertised, and
13
sold t-shirts bearing his expression
14
CARE" since soon after the video wais published, and he continues to sell t-shirts
15
bearing his expression and mark today.
16
under four separate registration numbers for
and mark of "HONEY BADGER DON'T
Defendant Thread Pit, Inc. (" Defendant") is a t-shirt company that produced
17
and sold t-shirts that copied verbatim Plaintiffs expression and trademark,
18
"HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE.
19
advertised its infringing products by promoting them as: "Honey Badger Don't
20
Care. He'll eat bee larvae and a cobrk . Ew, that's disgusting." In fact, those
21
expressions originate from Plaintiffs extremely popular video, and were used and
22
copied by Defendant just to boost its
23
nefarious activities, including its unauthorized sales of t-shirts and related
24
products bearing Plaintiffs trademark and expressions constitute, inter alia,
25
willful trademark and copyright infrin gement.
In addition, Defendant unlawfully
unlawful sales. Defendant's blatant
26
27
28
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1
2
1.
This is a civil action arisen g under the Trademark and Copyright
Laws of the United States, 15 U.S.C 1051, etseq., and 17 U.S.C. 101 etseq.
This Court has subject matterjurisdic(tion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338.
2.
This Court has su pplemejntal
jurisdiction over the claims in this
Complaint that arise under California law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a) because
the state law claims are so related to the
same case or controversy and derive from a common nucleus of operative facts,
3.
Venue is proper in this
federal claims that they form part of the
dourt pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and
10
1400(a). The infringing products which are the subject of this litigation have been
11
distributed and offered for distribution in the Central District of California, and
12
Defendant transacts business in the Central District of California. Defendant has
13
extensive contacts with, and conduct Dusiness within, this District; has placed
14
products into the stream of commerce in this District; and has caused tortious
15
injury to Plaintiff in this District

PARTIES
16
17
4.
Plaintiff is an individual
residing in Los Angeles, California,
18
5.
Plaintiff is informed and
believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant
19
Thread Pit, Inc. is a corporation
20
of this Court. Defendant produces
21
shirts, and conducts its business on the internet at www.6dollarshirts.com.
22
6.
formed
and
in Florida that is subject to the jurisdiction
sells merchandise, with an emphasis on t-
believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant
23
authorized, directed, participated in, contributed to, ratified, and/or accepted the
24
benefits of the wrongful acts as alleg vd
25
26
7.
The true names and
herein.
capacities , whether individual, corporate,
associate or otherwise of defendants
1DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are unknown
27
28
defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff
to Plaintiff who therefore sues said
is informed and believes and based thlereon alleges that each of the fictitiously
named defendants is responsible in some manner for the events, acts, occurrences
and liabilities alleged and referred to lerein. Plaintiff will seek leave to amend
this Complaint to allege the true nam$s and capacities of these DOE defendants
when the same are ascertained.
SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS
Plaintiff and His Vide a. Copyright, and Trademark
9
10
11
8.
Plaintiff is a comedian, r arrator, writer, and actor, and is commonly
known by his alias, "Randall."

9.
On January 18, 2011,
Plaintiff published a video (the "Video") on
12
YouTube that consisted of his original narration humorously describing the traits
13
of a honey badger.1 The Video, titled The Crazy Nastyass Honey Badger (original
14
narration by Randall), became an ins
15
of the most popular videos ever u plocjded onto YouTube. To date, the Video has
16
generated more than 70 million views on YouTube. The Video and subsequent
17
phenomenon have been covered by internet blogs such as the Huffington Post
18
(which proclaimed "Honey Badger D3n''t Care [as] the best nature video of all
19
time") as well as by entertainment news
20
10.
ant hit. The Video went "viral" and is one
sites like TMZ.
In the Video, Plaintiffs (briginal expression and joke is that the
plaintiffs original expression (and others
21
HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE,
22
contained in the Video) have gained
23
expressions have been referred to in dommercials, television shows, magazines,
24
and throughout the internet.
tremendous amount of notoriety, and his
25
26
27
The Video can be viewed at https://wvfw.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yig or by searching

on YouTube.com for The Crazy Nastyass Hone >Badger (original narration by Randall)
28
11.
Plaintiff copyrighted his narration in the Video. The copyright
registration number is PA 1-750-515, the effective date of registration is June 15,
2011, and the title is HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE. Attached hereto as
Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the certificate of Copyright Registration.

12.
Plaintiff is also the owner of the trademark HONEY BADGER
DON'T CARE (the "Mark"). Plaintiff registered the Mark with the United States
Patent and Trademark Office for various classes of goods under the following
Registration Numbers: 4,505,781; 4,419,079; 4,419,081; and 4,281,472.
Registration Number 4,505,781 specifically relates to the class of goods for
10
clothing, including t-shirts. Attached hereto as Exhibit B are true and correct
11
copies of the Trademark Registration!}.

13.
12
After the Video was pub ished, Plaintiff produced and sold goods,
13
including t-shirts, that displayed his Mark. Plaintiff continues to sell t-shirts under
14
the trademark HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE.
14.
15
Plaintiff primarily advertised the t-shirts bearing his Mark on the
16
internet. Sales of Plaintiffs t-shirts bearing his Mark have been substantial, with a
17
majority of the sales occurring via the internet.

15.
18
The Mark is instantly recognizable as being associated with Plaintiff
19
(i.e. Randall). The Mark appeared in Plaintiffs Video, and has since been
20
displayed on numerous advertisemem s and goods that Plaintiff promotes. Plaintiff
21
even authored a book titled Honey Be dger Don't Care: Randall's Guide to Crazy
22
Nastyass Animals, and launched a mcbile "app" titled The Honey Badger Don't
23
Care.
24
16.
Plaintiff has expended a significant amount of time and effort in
25
making his Mark well-known to the public. Plaintiff has promoted his Mark by,
26
inter alia, advertising it in connectior with his products, making guest
27
28
appearances in media outlets, and publicizing the Mark through social media
platforms.
17.
As a result of the foreg'olng, including, but not limited to, the
extensive advertisements, promotions , sales, and enormous popularity of the
Mark, the public has come to exclusi rely identify the Mark with Plaintiff. Among
other things, Plaintiff, his expression, joke and/or his Mark have appeared or been
alluded to in a Wonderful Pistachios
an episode of the popular television sfiow America's Got Talent, in an episode of
the hit television series Glee by the
jommercial during Dancing with the Stars, in
show''s
famous cheerleading coach Sue
10
Sylvester (Jane Lynch), in a Vogue piofik

ile of celebrity recording artist Taylor
11
Swift, and on the Howard Stern radio show (Baba Booey). Plaintiffs expression,
12
joke, and Mark are famous and distin tive under applicable law, including within
13
the meaning of 15 U.S.C. 1125(c )(1)
and 1127.
14
DEFENDANT'S UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES AND WILLFUL
15
INFRINGEMENT
16
17
18
18.
Defendant Thread Pit, Inc. is a competitor of Plaintiff, as it also
produces and sells t-shirts on the intefriet

19.
Defendant produced and sold t-shirts and sweatshirts that bore, inter
19
alia, Plaintiffs Mark and jokes and expressions that were copied verbatim from
20
Plaintiffs Video. Defendant produced and sold these goods throughout the
21
United States, including California,
22
20.
via
the internet at www.6dollarshirts.com.
Defendant's product des :riptions and advertisements for its
23
infringing merchandise reveals a cam|pai gn of willful infringement. For instance,
24
Defendant unlawfully advertised its infringing products by promoting them as:
25
"Honey Badger Don't Care. He'll eai bee larvae and a cobra. Ew, that's
26
disgusting." In fact, those expressions originate from Plaintiffs extremely popular
27
28
1
2
video, and were used and copied by Defendant just to
21.
increase its unlawful sales,
Defendant's manipulativb and unfair advertising of the infringing
merchandise enabled it to reap financial success, as Defendant produced and sold
infringing merchandise in various
generated substantial revenue in the pjrocess.
22.
sizes
and colors, for different products, and
Defendant's strategic ad vertisement was designed to capitalize on
Plaintiffs Mark, trample upon his iintellectual property rights, and cause customer
confusion, which actually happened
"This is the ORIGINAL Honey Badger T-Shirt." In reality, Plaintiffs t-shirts
10
11
as
one of Defendant's customers remarked,
bearing his federally registered Mark are the original shirts, not Defendant's.
23.
On July 25, 2014, Plaintiff s counsel demanded that Defendant stop
12
selling the infringing merchandise and
13
infringing products. Defendant agireed to stop selling the infringing merchandise,
14
only after generating substantial sales from the infringing merchandise, and only
15
after sales of the infringing merchandise began declining,
16
24.
Defendant's intentional
disclose the amount of sales for all
^nd deceitful acts of unfair competition and

caused confusion, and are likely to
17
use of the Mark and derivations thereof have
18
do so in the future, and have caused
19
association of the Defendant with Plantiff,",
20
approval of the Defendant's goods by
21
nor consented to the use by Defendan t of the Mark, any colorable imitation of it,
22
or any mark confusingly similar to it.
23
25.
njiistake and deception as to the affiliation or
and as to the origin, sponsorship, or
Plaintiff. Plaintiff has neither authorized
believes, and thereon alleges, that
24
Defendant's purpose in utilizing the Mark is an attempt to benefit unfairly from
25
the valuable goodwill and extreme popularity of the Mark, which was established
26
at great expense and effort by Plaintiff.
27
28
COMPLAINT AND ]DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
FIRST CLAIM
(Trademark Infringement under 15 U.S.C. 1114 et seq. Against All
Defendants)
4
5
6
7
8
26.
Plaintiff repeats, repleadp and realleges the allegations contained in
Paragraphs 1 through 25, as though fully

27.
The aforesaid acts of De
set forth herein,
endant constitute infringement of the Mark
under 15 U.S.C. 1114^5^.
28.
As a direct and proximat|e result of Defendant's wrongful acts,

suffer and/or is likely to suffer damage to
Plaintiff has suffered and continues
10
his trademark, reputation, and goodwill
11
and will cause irreparable damage to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at
12
law and is entitled to an injunction
13
employees, and all persons acting in ioncert with them, from engaging in further
14
acts of infringement.
15
29.
res
Defendant will continue to use the Mark
training Defendant and its officers, agents,
Plaintiff is further entitled to recover from Defendant the actual
16
damages that he sustained and/or is likely to
17
wrongful acts. Plaintiff is presently linable to ascertain the full extent of the
18
monetary damages that he has sustained and/or is likely to sustain by reason of
19
Defendant's acts of trademark infrind ement.
20
30.
Plaintiff is further entitled
sustain as a result of Defendant's
to recover from Defendant the gains,
21
profits, and advantages that Defendant has obtained as a result of its wrongful
22
acts. Plaintiff is presently unable to scertain the extent of the gains, profits, and
23
advantages that Defendant has realized by reason of its acts of trademark
24
infringement.
25
26
31.
Because of the willful
Plaintiff is entitled to all remedies
nature of the wrongful acts of Defendant,
available under 15 U.S.C. 1117 and 1118,
27
28
including, but not limited to, an award of treble damages and increased profits
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117.
3
4
32.
Plaintiffalso is entitled tjo recover his attorney's fees and costs of suit
SECOND CLAIM
(Trademark Infringement under 1California Business and Professions Code
section 14245 et seq. and California Common Law Against All Defendants)
8
9
10
33.
Plaintiff repeats, replead and realleges the allegations contained in

34.
set forth herein.
Defendant's use of the Mark without Plaintiffs consent constitutes
11
trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation
12
law in that, among other things, such use is likely to cause confusion, deception,
13
and mistake among the consuming pibl ic as to the source, approval or sponsorship
14
of the goods offered by Defendant.
15
35.
The acts and conduct
of California common
of Defendant complained of herein constitute
16
trademark infringement and unfair colmpetition in violation of the statutory law of
17
California, including California Business
18
seq., in that, among other things, Defendant's acts and conduct are likely to cause
19
confusion, deception, and mistake arrjong the consuming public as to the source,
20
approval or sponsorship of the goods offered by Defendant. Defendant's acts are
21
designed to trade upon Plaintiffs reputation and goodwill by causing confusion
22
and mistake among consumers and
23
and permanent injunctions restraining and enjoining Defendant and its officers,
24
agents, affiliates, vendors, partners
ard
25
concert with Defendant, from using
in
26
Mark and his common law rights in
the Mark.
and Professions Code section 14245 et
public. Plaintiff is entitled to preliminary
the
employees, and all persons acting in
commerce Plaintiffs federally registered
27
28
36.
As a direct and proximate result
of Defendant's willful and
intentional actions, Plaintiff has suffered damages in an amount to be determined
at trial. Plaintiff is entitled to all remedies provided by California Business and
Professions Code section 14247 et seti
three times Defendant's profits and damages suffered by reason of their wrongful
conduct. Because of the willful natuife of Defendant's wrongful acts, Plaintiff is
entitled to an award of punitive damalges
, including injunctive relief and recovery of
THIRD CLAIM
(Trademark Dilution under 15 J.S.C. 1125(c) Against All Defendants)
37.
10
11
1 through 36, above, as though fully iet forth herein.

3 8.
12
13
Plaintiff repeats and real eges each and every allegation of paragraphs
Plaintiff has used his
Mark to identify his products before Defendant
began using the Mark without his perlmission.

39.
14
The Mark is inherently distinctive and has acquired distinction
15
through Plaintiffs extensive, continubus, and exclusive use of the Mark. The
16
Mark is famous and distinctive withiit the meaning of 15 U.S.C. 1125(c)(1) and
17
1127.
18
19
20
40.
Defendant's use of the
Mark is likely to dilute the distinctive quality
of the Mark in violation of 15 U.S.C
41.
1125(c).
As a direct and proximat|e result of Defendant's wrongful acts,

suffer and/or is likely to suffer damage to
21
Plaintiff has suffered and continues to
22
his trademarks, reputation, and g oodvl/ill. Defendant will continue to use the Mark
23
and will cause irreparable damage to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at
24
law and is entitled to an injunction restraining Defendant, its officers, agents, and
25
employees, and all persons acting in (toncert with them, from engaging in further
26
acts of trademark dilution.
27
28
10
42.
Plaintiff is entitled to redover
from Defendant the actual damages that
he sustained and/or is likely to sustain as a result of Defendant's wrongful acts,
Plaintiff is presently unable to ascertain the full extent of the monetary damages
that he has sustained and/or is likely to sustain by reason of Defendant's acts of
trademark dilution.
43.
Plaintiff is further entitlejd to recover from
Defendant the gains,
profits, and advantages that Defendar t has obtained as a result of its wrongful
acts. Plaintiff is presently unable to ascertain the extent of the gains, profits, and
advantages that Defendant has realizejd by reason of its acts of trademark dilution,
10
44.
nature of the wrongful acts of Defendant,
available under 15 U.S.C. 1117 and 1118,
11
Plaintiff is entitled to all remedies
12
including an award of treble damages and increased profits pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
13
1117.
14
15
45.
Plaintiff also is entitled
tb recover his attorney's fees and costs of suit
16
FOURTH CLAIM
17
(Federal Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin in Violation of
18
15 U.S.C. 1125(a ) Against All Defendants)
19
20
21
46.
Plaintiff repeats, replead^ and realleges the allegations contained in
47.
set forth herein.
Defendant's acts as allegbd above constitute unfair competition and a
22
false designation of origin which have caused confusion, mistake, deception as to
23
the affiliation, connection or association of Defendant with Plaintiff and as to the
24
origin, sponsorship, or approval of Defendant's goods, services and/or activities
25
by Plaintiff and are likely to do so in he future, in violation of the Lanham Act, 15
26
U.S.C. 1125(a).
27
28
11
48.
As a direct and proximat s result of Defendant's wrongful acts,
suffer and is likely to suffer damage to his
Plaintiff has suffered and continues to
reputation, goodwill, and to the Mark Defendant will continue the activities
alleged herein and will cause irrepara:>le damage to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has no
adequate remedy at law and is entitled to an injunction restraining Defendant, its
officers, agents, affiliates, vendors, partners and employees, and all persons acting
in concert with Defendant, from engaging in further acts of unfair competition,
deceitful acts using the Mark, and faUe designation of origin and false affiliation
and association.
10
49.
Plaintiff is further entitleld to recover from Defendant the actual
11
damages that he sustained and/or is licely to
12
wrongful and devious acts. Plaintiff is presently unable to ascertain the full extent
13
of the monetary damages that he has Suffered and/or is likely to sustain by reason
14
of Defendant's acts of unfair
15
affiliation and association.
16
50.
sustain as a result of Defendant's
competjtion and false designation of origin and false
Plaintiff is further entitled to recover from Defendant the gains,
17
profits, and advantages it has obtained as a result of its wrongful and malicious
18
acts. Plaintiff is presently unable to ascertain the extent of the gains, profits, and
19
advantages that Defendant has realizejd by reason of its acts of unfair competition
20
and false designation of origin and fa
21
51.
se affiliation and association,
nalture of the wrongful acts of Defendant,
22
Plaintiff is entitled to an award of treble damages and increased profits pursuant to
23
15 U.S.C. 1117.
24
25
52.
Plaintiff is also entitled
tD recover his attorney's fees and costs of suit
26
27
28
12
FIFTH CLAIM
(Unfair Competition Against All Defendants)
3
4
5
53.
Plaintiff repeats, replead and realleges the allegations contained in

54.
set forth herein.
Defendant's acts constitute unfair competition under the statutory law
of California, including California Business and Professions Code section 17200,
et seq., and under the common law oftthe
55.
The acts and conduct of
State of California.
Defendant complained of herein have caused
Plaintiff irreparable injury, and will unless retrained, further impair the value of
10
his Mark, intellectual property rights, reputation, and goodwill. Plaintiff has no
11
adequate remedy at law.
12
56.
believes that Defendant has unlawfully
13
obtained profits through its acts of unfair competition. Defendant should be
14
forced to disgorge such unlawful
15
57.
its to Plaintiff,
Plaintiff is further entitled to recover from Defendant his actual
16
damages sustained as a result of Defendant 's wrongful acts. Plaintiff is presently
17
unable to ascertain the full extent of tie
18
reason of Defendant's acts of unfair
19
20
58.
monetary damages he has suffered by
competition.
Because of the willful nature
of Defendant's wrongful acts, Plaintiff
is entitled to an award of punitive darhages
21
SIXTH CLAIM
22
(Copyright Infringement Against All Defendants)
23
24
25
26
59.
Plaintiff repeats, repleads and realleges the allegations contained in

60.
set forth herein,
Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant had access to the
Video, through, inter alia, YouTube.
27
28
13
Defendant manufactured!, produced, and sold merchandise, including

but not limited to t-shirts, that copy verbatim Plaintiffsjokes and expressions
from his Video, such as his joke and expression that the "Honey Badger Don't
Care." Defendant's uses of Plaintiff
jokes and expressions are substantially
similar to Plaintiffs use in the Video
In fact, Defendant's use is an exact copy
verbatim of Plaintiffs jokes and expressions contained in his copyrighted Video,
Moreover, Defendant unlawfully advertised its infringing products by promoting
them as: "Honey Badger Don't Care, He'll eat bee larvae and a cobra. Ew, that's
disgusting." In fact, those expressionjs originate from Plaintiffs Video, and were
10
11
61.
used and copied by Defendant just to

62.
boost its unlawful sales.
Defendant infringed Plaintiffs copyright by manufacturing,
12
producing, advertising, and selling merchandise that prominently displayed
13
Plaintiffs jokes and expressions that le used in his copyrighted Video. Defendant
14
sold its infringing merchandise on the internet at www.6dollarshirts.com.
15
Defendant's conduct violated Plaintifjf s exclusive right in his expressions and
16
jokes contained in his Video.
17
63.
believes that Defendants, and each of them,
18
knowingly induced, participated in aided and abetted in, and profited from the
19
illegal copying and/or subsequent
20
Plaintiffs expressions and jokes from
21
64.
sales
of the infringing merchandise featuring
the Video.
believes that Defendants, and each of them,
22
are vicariously liable for the infringerjient alleged herein because they had the
23
right and ability to supervise the infrijiging conduct and because they had a direct
24
financial interest in the infringing corjduct. As such, Defendants, and each of
25
them, are liable for vicarious and/or contributory copyright infringement under 17
26
U.S.C. 101.
27
28
14
65.
1
2
substantial damage to his business in

66.
3
4
Due to Defendant's acts
of infringement, Plaintiff has suffered

an amount to be established at trial,
of infringement, Plaintiff has suffered
general and special damages in an amlount to be established at trial.

67.
of copyright infringement, Defendant has
obtained direct and indirect profits it vould not otherwise have realized but for its
infringement. As such, Plaintiff is en titled to disgorgement of Defendant's profits
directly and indirectly attributable to Defendant's infringement of Plaintiffs jokes
and expressions used in his Video in fin amount to be established at trial,

68.
10
believes that Defendant infringed Plaintiffs
11
copyright with knowledge that he
12
and jokes as contained in the Video ahd/or that Defendant was reckless in
13
committing the infringement alleged l|ierein. Defendant's acts of copyright
14
infringement were willful, intentional and malicious, subjecting Defendant to
15
liability for statutory damages under ection 504(c)(2) of the Copyright Act in the
16
sum of up to $150,000 per infring ement and/or Defendant is precluded from
17
deducting certain overhead expenses vhen calculating profits for disgorgement.
owied
the exclusive rights in his expressions
18
19
///
20
///
21
///
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15
PRAYElt FOR RELIEF
1
2
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff pray >for judgment against Defendant, as follows:
1.
That Defendant has (i) ir fringed the Mark under 15 U.S.C. 1114 et
seq.; (ii) infringed the Mark under California law; (iii) violated 15 U.S.C.
1125(c); (iv) violated 15 U.S.C. 1 125(ca); (v) engaged in unfair competition and
violated California Business and
infringed Plaintiffs rights in his federally registered copyright under 17 U.S.C.
501.
Professions Code section 17200 et seq.; and (vi)
2.
That each of the above aits were willful.
10
3.
That Plaintiff be awardec
(i) all profits of Defendant, (ii) all of his
11
damages, (iii) statutory damages avai able under the law including 15 U.S.C.
12
1117 and 17 U.S.C. 504, if elected, (iv) treble damages, (v) punitive damages,
13
(vi) disgorgement and restitution of a 1benefits received by Defendants arising
14
from their infringement as provided by law, and/or (vii) enhanced damages for
15
Defendant's willful infringement as provided in 15 U.S.C. 1117 and 17 U.S.C.
16
504, the sum of which will be proveh
17
4.
at the time of trial.
That Defendant, its officers , agents, servants, affiliates, partners,
18
vendors, employees and attorneys
19
participation with them, be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from:
20
a.
ani
those persons in active concert or
Using Plaintiffs expression and mark "HONEY BADGER
any colorable imitation thereof, or any other
21
DON'T CARE" or
22
expression or mark likely to cause confusion, mistake, or
23
deception, in
24
distribution, manu facturimg, advertising, or promotion of their
25
goods or services;
connection
with the sale, offering for sale,
26
27
28
16
b.
Using any false
designation oforigin or false description that
can, or is likely to lead the public to believe that any product
manufactured, distributed, sold, offered for sale, or advertised
by Defendant are iin any manner associated or connected with
Plaintiff is sold,
approved or autho rized by Plaintiff;
c.
manufactured, licensed, sponsored, or
Engaging in any o :her activity constituting an infringement of
Plaintiffs trademark and copyright rights or otherwise unfairly
competing with Pllaintiff; and

d.
10
Engaging in any o :her activity that dilutes the distinctive
11
quality of the Marjc by, among other things, using the Mark in
12
connection with the
13
manufacturing, advertising, or promotion of its goods,

5.
14
sale, offering for sale, distribution,
That Defendant be directed
to deliver up to Plaintiff all products
15
bearing the Mark, any copy, simulation , variation or colorable imitations of the
16
Mark, and any documents or tangible things that discuss, describe, mention or
17
relate to such products.

6.
18
That Defendant file with
the Court and serve upon Plaintiffs counsel
19
within thirty (30) days after entry ofj adgment a report in writing under oath
20
setting forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendant has complied with
21
the requirements of the injunction.
7.
22
23
That Defendant be requijed to pay to Plaintiff all of his costs,
disbursements, and attorney's fees in

8.
24
25
///
26
///
this action.
For prejudgment interest
27
28
17
9.
For such other relief as tie Court deems proper
DATED: November 20, 2014
KRANE & SMITH, APC
3
4
By:.
5
6
Oil^
DANIEL L. REBACK
JEREMY SMITH
Attorneys for Plaintiff,

CHRISTOPHER GORDON
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Plaintiff CHRISTOPHER GOPDON hereby demands a jury trial in this

3
action.
4
5
DATED: November 20, 2014
KRANE & SMITH, APC
6
7
By
: QflfrL^
DANIEL L. REBACK
JEREMY SMITH
8
9
ey; for Plaintiff,

Attorneys
CHRISTOPHER
GORDON
>T<
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19
T^Pd ISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
(LIFORNIA
UNITED STA
CIVIL COVER SHEET
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS ( Check box ifyou are representing yourself )
DEFENDANTS
CHRISTOPHER GORDON,
THREAD PIT, INC., A CORPORATION;

to 10, INCLUSIVE
AN
INDIVIDUAL
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff LOS ANGELES
(Check box ifyou are representing yourself )

and DOES
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFFCASES)
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number) Ifyou are
Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number) Ifyou are
representing yourself, provide the same information.
representing yourself, provide the same information.
KRANE
& SMITH,
APC
16255 VENTURA BLVD

SUITE 600
ENCINO,
CA 91436
818-382-4000
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES-For Diversity Cases Only

(PI; : an X in one box for plaintiff and one for defendant)
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in one box only.)
tX] 3. Federal Question (U.S.
1. U.S. Government
PTF
DEF
DEF
Citizen of
Another State CZl 2 CZI 2 Incorporated and Principal Place .i
ii
1 lncorPrated ' Principal Place r] 4 r] 4

of Business in this State
Government Not a Party)
Plaintiff
[This State
PTF
Citizen of
2. U.S. Government
Defendant
4. Diversity (Indicate Citizenship
Citizen or
of Parties in Item III)
Foreign Cbuntry
Subject of a
..
,,
I3 I
of Business in Another State
I 3 Foreign Nation
IV. ORIGIN (Place an X in one box only.)
X I 1-Original
2.Removed from
Proceeding
[~^ 3.Remanded from [~^ 4.Reinstated or

Reope ned
Appellate Court
State Court
5. Transferred from Another
V. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND: [jTjYes
No
CLASS ACTION under F.R.Cv.P. 23: [Z]Yes [jT]No
District (Specify)
6 I
I6
6. MultiDistrict
Litigation
(Check "Yes" only if demanded in complaint.)
E>T MONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT: $ TBD
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION (Citethe U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and writfe a brief statement of cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity.)
Trademark Infringement, Dilution and False Designation (15 UJ .S.C. 1114 and 1125); Copyright Infringement (17
U.S.C. 3101): eta
VII. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in one box only).

I
OTHER STATUTES
CONTRACT
I 375 False Claims Act
I 110 Insurance
[| 400 State
Reapportionment
410 Antitrust
I 430 Banks and Banking
130 Miller Act
| Overpayments
Enforcement of
Judgment
ii 470 Racketeer Influ
I 480 Consumer Credit
I 490 Cable/Sat TV
modifies/Exchange
Actions
I 896 Arbitration
I310 Airplane
1315 Airplane
Act/Review of Appeal of
Product Liability
19 i Franchise
ii 950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes
1210 Land
Condemnation
Agency Decision
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
350 Motor Vehicle

1355Motor Vehicle
550 Civil Rights
Pi operty Damage
1555 PrisonCondition
1560Civil Detainee
1Conditions of
Injury
1362 Personal InjuryMed Malpratice
I 1Product Liability
Personal Injury
Product Liability
864 SSID TitleXVI
865 RSI (405 (g))
1Seizure ofProperty 21
870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or

Defendant)
871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC
7609
USC 881
I 690 Other
4'0
Other Civil Rights
4<1
Voting
I 710 Fair Labor Standards
Employment
4'3 Housing/
| 720 Labor/Mgmt.
Accomodations
740 Railway Labor Act

I 1751 Family and Medical
Act
Relations
'' Leave Act
1790 Other Labor
| 791 Employee Ret. Inc.
4' 6 American with
Litigation
D sabilities-Other
, 368 Asbestos
1Personal Injury
Product
'roduct Liability
Liability
I863DIWC/DIWW (405 (g))
625 Drug Related
'
4.:UiC 157
ID sabilitiesEi riployment
Pharmaceutical
[ 230 RentLease & I
EITMRE/PENALTY
3 Withdrawal 28
4' 5 American with
367 Health Care/
220 Foreclosure
I i 862 Black Lung (923)
Confinement
2 Appeal 28
4'2
365 Personal Injury-
I 861 HIA(1395ff)
CIVIL RIGHTS
I 1360 Other Personal
^mWmMr.
330 Other Personal
use 158
SOCIAL SECURrtY
] 535 Death Penalty
BUNKRUPTCY
840 Trademark
!~Z\530 General
540 Mandamus/Other
Property Damage
830 Patent
1510 Motions to Vacate
' Sentence
Product Liability
1 ' Liability
3 1 Truth in Lending
3! 5
CZI 340 Marine

I 1345Marine Product
Ejectment
CV-71 (06/14)
1 ' Liability
PROPERTY RIGHTS iV
820 Copyrights
CZl 463 Alien Detainee
r~37f0Other Fraud
1 ' Product Liability
.REAL PROPERTY
899 Admin. Procedures
'in migration Actions
Product Liability
1 190 Other
|| 195Contract
'.,
PERSONAL PROPERTY
Contract
Act
TORTS
PERSONAL PROPERTY
Suits
' Slander
1330 Fed. Employers'
| 160 Stockholders'
Appl ication
Property
,JORTS
290 All Other Real
1
I
I Defaulted Student
Habeas Corpus:
2 Naturalization
5 Other
152 Recovery of
Vet. Benefits
Matters
895 Freedom of Info.
PWSfflgJtaBMNS
II MIGRATION
Liability
1320 Assault, Libel &
I Overpayment of
EZl 891 Agricultural Acts

893 Environmental
1245 TortProduct
153 Recovery of
|i 890 Other Statutory
I 151 Medicare Act
Loan (Excl. Vet.)
I| 850 Securities/Com
240 Tortsto Land
| 140 Negotiable
150 Recovery of
I 460 Deportation
enced & Corrupt Org.
Instrument
450 Commerce/ICC
Rates/Etc.
I 120 Marine
REAL PROPERTY CONT.
4' 8 Education
C-V14-0899*
Security Act
Case Number:
CIVIL COVER SHEET
Page 1 of 3
CCO-CV71
STRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT WTCALIFORNIA
UNITED STATI
CIVIL COVER:SHEET
VIII. VENUE: Your answerstothe questionsbelow will determinethe division ofthe iourt to whichthis case will be initially assigned. This initial assignment is subject
to change, in accordance with the Court's General Orders, upon review by the Court of yoi Complaint or Notice of Removal.
QUESTION A: Was this case removed
.initial brîT'''
STATE CASE WAS PENpIN* IIN THE COUrflVJOF:
from state court?
Yes
IX
:-..:.*;:^';^^3W^:s
No
I
If"no," skip to Question B. If"yes," check the
box to the right that applies, enter the
corresponding division in response to
I Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbs ra,
or San Luis Obispo
Western
EE Orange
Southern
Riverside or San Bernardino
Question E, below, and continue from there.
Eastern
'** fr'^'s*-L^y^fi^
rfr;*.?ail
t"&i-jjfrfeêa'a*r--
QUESTION B:
Is the United States, or B.1. Do 50% or more of the defendants wjio reside in
the district reside in Orange Co.?
one of its agencies or employees, a
YES. Your case willinitiallybe assigned to the Southern Division
CZI Enter"Southern" in response toQuestion E, below, andcontinue
PLAINTIFF in this action?
from there.
check oneofthe boxestothe right ^

Yes
No
DnO. Continue to Question B.2.

B.2. Do 50% or more of the defendants vt ho reside in
If"no," skip to Question C. If"yes," answer

Question B.1, at right.
the district reside in Riverside and/or San Bernardino
Counties? (Consider the two counties togethier.)
YES. Your case willinitially be assigned to the Eastern Division.
LZlEnter "Eastern" inresponsetoQuestion E,below, andcontinue

from there.
check one of the boxes to the right
NO. Your case will initiallybe assigned to the Western Division
IZZI Enter"Western" in response toQuestion E, below, andcontinue

from there.
-NTJ* 2fcJ*Xv^'"jJ" '
hHii<mr
QUESTION C:
Is the United States, or C.1. Do 50% or more of the plaintiffs who reside in the
district reside in Orange Co.?
one of its agencies or employees, a
YES. Yourcase will initiallybe assigned to the Southern Division
CZ]Enter"Southern" in response toQuestionE, below, andcontinue
DEFENDANT in this action?
from there.
check oneofthe boxes tothe right
Yes
No
NO. Continue to Question C.2.
C.2. Do 50% or more of the plaintiffs who reside in the

If"no," skip to Question D. If"yes," answer
Question C.1, at right.
district reside in Riverside and/or San Ber lardino
YES. Your case willinitially be assigned to the Eastern Division
CZl Enter "Eastern" in response toQuestion E, below, andcontinue
Counties? (Consider the two counties together.)
from there.
check oneofthe boxestothe right ^
NO. Your case will initially be assigned to the Western Division
CZl Enter"Western" in response toQuestion E, below, andcontinue

from there.
, RiversWe or _.
QUESTION D: Location of plaintiffs arid defendants?

":;;:
*si..--\ J;;V;..''>?:-V.'-.. {*
' .
"V,s\''-
' '";:'''
Orange
,".' '.,
7%!
?S'~ ..;
Indicate the location(s) in which 50% or more ofplaintiffs who reside in this distridf
8emaraino.G6.unl
reside. (Check up to two boxes, or leave blank if none of these choices apply.)
Indicate the location(s) in which 50% or more of defendants who reside in this
district reside. (Check up to two boxes, or leave blank if none of these choices
apply-)
m^M^fiff^'mmr^M^^'i
D.1. Is there at least one answer in Column A?
Yes
D.2. Is there at least one answer in Column B?
[X] No
I Yes
I X INo
If "yes," your case will initially be assigned to the
If "yes," your case will initially be assigned to the

SOUTHERN DIVISION.
EASTERN DIVISION.
Enter "Southern" in response to Question E, below, and continue from there.
Enter "Eastern" in response to Question E, below.
If "no," go to question D2 totheright.
If "no," your case will be assigned to the WESTERN DIVISION.
^^^"
Enter "Western" in response to Question E, below.
|1 Division?
^mm^^mM(!^M^^mM
Enter the initial division determined by Question A, B, C, or D above: I
WESTERN
3untles?r ..;"&:. ?>*-^v'sesî*

Do 50% or more of plaintiffs or defendants in this district reside in Ventura, Santa
CV-71 (06/14)
^<!$rf!fe:;$$&x'Barbara, or San Luis Obispo counties?
CIVIL COVER SHEET
IYes
i X INo
Page 2 of 3
*K
UNITED STATESWSTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL cover! SHEET

IX(a). IDENTICAL CASES: Has this action been previously filed in this courtf?
SH NO
YES
If yes, list case number(s):
IX(b). RELATED CASES: Is this case related (as defined below) to any cases oreviously filed in this court?
l~Xl NO
YES
If yes, list case number(s):
Civil cases are related when they: (1) arise from the same or a closely related transaction, happening, or event; (2) call for determination of
the same or substantially related or similar questions of law and fact; or ;3) for other reasons would entail substantial duplication of labor if
heard by different judges. That cases may involve the same patent, trademark. or copyright is not, in itself, sufficient to deem cases related.
X. SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY
(OR SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT):
DATE:
(l-?.P-H(
Notice to Counsel/Parties: The submission of this Civil Cover Sheet is required )y Local Rule 3-1. This Form CV-71 and the information contained herein
neither replaces nor supplements the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. For
more detailed instructions, see separate instruction sheet (CV-071A).
Key to Statistical codes relating to Social Security Cases

Nature of Suit Code
Abbreviation
Substantive Statement of C ause of Action
(N/ edicare) under Title 18, Part A, of the Social Security Act, as amended. Also,
include claims by hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, etc., for certification as providers of services under the program.
All claims for health insurance benefits

861
HIA
(42 U.S.C. 1935FF(b))

862
BL
863
DIWC
Allclaims for "Black Lung" benefits under Title4, Part B, of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. (30 U.S.C.
923)
All claims filed by insured workers for disib ility insurance benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended; plus
based on disability. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))
all claims filed for child's insurance bene fits
863
DIWW
864
SSID
All claims filed forwidows or widowers insurance benefits based on disability under Title 2 ofthe SocialSecurity Act, as
amended. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))
All claims forsupplemental security incorjie payments based upondisability filed underTitle 16oftheSocial Security Act, as
amended.
865
RSI
All claims for retirement (old age)andsufvivors benefits under Title 2 oftheSocial Security Act, as amended.
(42 U.S.C. 405 (g))
CV-71 (06/14)
CIVIL COVER ! iHEET
Page 3 of 3

Honey Badger Don't Care Trademark Copyright Complaint PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Honey Badger Don't Care Trademark Copyright Complaint PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Daniel L. Reback (SBN 239884)

Jeremy Smith (SBN 242430)

KRANE & SMITH, APC

Attorneys for Plaintiff,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

INFRINGEMENT [15 U.S.C.

THREAD PIT, INC., a corporation;

and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive,

INFRINGEMENT [California law];

DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN [15

[California law]; and

[17 U.S.C. 501]

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff CHRISTOPHER GOILDON ("Plaintiff) alleges as follows:

yvho, on January 18, 2011, published a video

Plaintiff is a comedic narrator

on YouTube that consisted of his ori

million views on YouTube. In the

"HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE,' among others. Plaintiffs original expression

to in commercials, television shows, magazines, and throughout the internet, and

inal narration humorously describing the

video, Plaintiffs original expression and joke is

by numerous celebrities. Plaintiffcoj)yriighted his narration, and also trademarked

"HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE"

sold t-shirts bearing his expression

bearing his expression and mark today.

under four separate registration numbers for

and mark of "HONEY BADGER DON'T

"HONEY BADGER DON'T CARE.

copied by Defendant just to boost its

nefarious activities, including its unauthorized sales of t-shirts and related

products bearing Plaintiffs trademark and expressions constitute, inter alia,

willful trademark and copyright infrin gement.

In addition, Defendant unlawfully

unlawful sales. Defendant's blatant

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This is a civil action arisen g under the Trademark and Copyright

This Court has su pplemejntal

jurisdiction over the claims in this

the state law claims are so related to the

Venue is proper in this

federal claims that they form part of the

dourt pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and

Defendant transacts business in the Central District of California. Defendant has

injury to Plaintiff in this District

residing in Los Angeles, California,

Plaintiff is informed and

believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant

Thread Pit, Inc. is a corporation

of this Court. Defendant produces

shirts, and conducts its business on the internet at www.6dollarshirts.com.

Plaintiff is informed and

in Florida that is subject to the jurisdiction

sells merchandise, with an emphasis on t-

believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant

benefits of the wrongful acts as alleg vd

The true names and

capacities , whether individual, corporate,

associate or otherwise of defendants