Wynn Resorts vs. Resorts World Las Vegas Lawsuit

Case 2:18-cv-02410-JAD-CWH Document 1 Filed 12/21/18 Page 1 of 17
MICHAEL D. ROUNDS, ESQ.

1 Nevada Bar No. 4734
2 MATTHEW D. FRANCIS, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 6978
3 PETER H. AJEMIAN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 9491
4 SAMANTHA J. REVIGLIO, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 14258
5 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP
6 100 North City Parkway, Suite 1600
Las Vegas, NV 89106-4614
7 Telephone: (702) 382-2101
Facsimile: (702) 382-8135
8 Email: mrounds@bhfs.com
mfrancis@bhfs.com
9 pajemian@bhfs.com
10 sreviglio@bhfs.com
B ROWNSTEIN H YATT FARBER SCHRECK , LLP
100 NORTH CITY PARKWAY, SUITE 1600
11 Attorneys for Plaintiff Wynn Resorts Holdings, LLC

LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89106-4614
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
14
WYNN RESORTS HOLDINGS, LLC, Case No.:
15 a Nevada limited liability company,
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
16 Plaintiff, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
17 v. (1) Trademark Infringement under 15 U.S.C.

§ 1114
18 RESORTS WORLD LAS VEGAS, LLC, a (2) Unfair Competition under 15 U.S.C.
Delaware limited liability company, § 1125(a)
19 (3) Trademark Dilution under 15 U.S.C. §
Defendant. 1125(c)
20 (4) State Trademark Dilution under NRS
600.435
21 (5) Copyright Infringement under 17 U.S.C. §
501 et seq.
22
JURY DEMAND
23
24
Wynn Resorts Holdings, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Wynn”), for its Complaint against Resorts
25
World Las Vegas, LLC (“Resorts World” or “Defendant”), a Delaware limited liability company,
26
alleges the following:
27
28
1
1 NATURE OF THE CASE
2 1. This is an action for trade dress infringement under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§
3 1114 and 1125(a), trademark dilution under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c), state trademark dilution under
4 NRS 600.435, and copyright infringement under the Copyright Act,17 U.S.C. § 501 et seq.. This
5 Court’s assertion of subject matter jurisdiction over this case is proper pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§
6 1119 and 1121, 17 U.S.C. § 501, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338, and 1400.
7 2. This action arises out of Defendant’s unlawful and unauthorized adoption and use of
8 the Plaintiff’s registered and world famous architectural building design consisting, in relevant part,
9 of a three-dimensional building with concave facade, and curved, bronze glass, coupled with
10 horizontal banding above and between the lines of glass panes (“Plaintiff’s Trade Dress”).
11 3. The design of Defendant’s new Resorts World Las Vegas hotel and casino directly
12 across the street from Plaintiff’s world famous Wynn and Encore resort hotel casinos is
13 substantially and confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s Trade Dress and copyrighted architectural work,
14 which Plaintiff has used in conjunction with its resort hotel and casino services in the United States
15 and abroad for many years.
16 4. By using trade dress that is confusingly similar to Plaintiff's registered and common
17 law Trade Dress in connection with the same or highly similar hotel and casino services that are
18 offered by Plaintiff, Defendant is misleading the consuming public into falsely believing that it is
19 affiliated with, sponsored by or associated with Plaintiff, when it is not.
20 5. Additionally, the architectural design embodied in Defendant’s Resorts World Las
21 Vegas hotel and casino is substantially similar to Plaintiff’s registered copyrighted architectural
22 work, and therefore Defendant is violating Plaintiff’s copyrights in addition to Plaintiff’s registered
23 and common law Trade Dress.
24 6. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, temporary,
25 preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, and other additional relief.
26 PARTIES
27 7. Plaintiff Wynn Resorts Holdings, LLC is a Nevada limited liability company doing
28 business in Las Vegas, Nevada.
2
1 8. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Resorts World has its
2 principal place of business located at 3000 South Las Vegas Boulevard, Las Vegas, Nevada 89109.
3 9. Resorts World registered to do business in Nevada with the Nevada Secretary of
4 State on March 25, 2013, and is listed as Entity No. E0152172013-1.
5 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6 10. This Court’s assertion of personal jurisdiction over Defendant is proper based upon
7 its purposeful aiming of infringing conduct at Plaintiff and Nevada residents in the State of Nevada,
8 which is causing and will continue to cause Plaintiff irreparable harm. Specifically, Defendant
9 purposefully aimed its activities toward the Plaintiff and the residents of the District of Nevada
10 when it willfully commenced infringing Plaintiff’s intellectual property rights, knowing that
11 Plaintiff is headquartered in the District of Nevada and that its residents regularly visit the Wynn
12 and Encore properties there. Furthermore, Defendant’s infringing activities are taking place in Las
13 Vegas, Nevada, where Resorts World has its principal place of business, in eyeshot of Plaintiff’s
14 Wynn and Encore buildings.
15 11. Venue is proper in the unofficial Southern Division of the United States District
16 Court for the District of Nevada under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), and 1400(a), because the Defendant
17 conducts business in this judicial district, it or its agents or affiliates can be found in this judicial
18 district, and acts giving rise to this Complaint have taken place in this judicial district.
19 PLAINTIFF'S RIGHTS IN ITS TRADE DRESS AND COPYRIGHT
20 12. Plaintiff’s affiliates own and operate the Wynn Las Vegas (“WLV”) and Encore Las
21 Vegas (“Encore”) luxury resorts, casinos and hotels in Las Vegas, Nevada, which hold more Forbes
22 five-star awards than any other hotel and casino resort in the world, and are considered to be among
23 the finest hotels in the world.
24 13. WLV opened on April 28, 2005, and the Encore opened on December 22, 2008.
25 Since WLV opened in 2005, Plaintiff’s affiliates have offered, and continue to offer, the highest
26 quality gaming, hotel resort, casino, restaurant, bar, spa and entertainment services to millions of
27 consumers from Nevada and around the world. The two properties are not only known for the
28 highest quality services and goods offered within those respective properties, but also for the
3
1 distinctive architectural designs and Trade Dress, which attract consumers to the properties. Both
2 properties are known for their concave facades, and curved, bronze glass, coupled with horizontal
3 banding above and between the lines of glass panes (i.e., Plaintiff’s Trade Dress). Photographs of
4 the WLV and Encore appear below:
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
14. Plaintiff's rights in its famous WLV and Encore buildings are not only protected by
15
the common law, but also by incontestable United States Trademark Registration No. 3,195,978
16
(“‘978 Reg.”), which registered on January 9, 2007. A copy of the ‘978 Reg. is attached hereto as
17
Exhibit A.
18
15. Since adopting its distinctive architectural designs and Trade Dress, Plaintiff has
19
continuously used such designs and trade dress at its WLV and Encore properties, and has also
20
expanded use of such designs and trade dress abroad at the Wynn Macau located at Rua Cidade de
21
Sintra, NAPE, Macaue, which opened on September 6, 2006. See https://www.wynnmacau.com.
22
The same design implemented for the WLV and Encore in Las Vegas, Nevada was adopted for the
23
Wynn Macau. Id. A photograph of the Wynn Macau, which contains Plaintiff’s Trade Dress,
24
appears below:
25
26
27
28
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 16. In addition to the WLV, Encore, and the Wynn Macau, Plaintiff’s same Trade Dress
10 is currently being implemented for the Encore Boston Harbor, which is scheduled to open in June
11 of 2019. See http://www.encorebostonharbor.com/. A rendering of the Encore Boston Harbor

12 appears below, as does a photograph of the construction of the resort:

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
17. Millions of people from around the world have visited or stayed in Wynn and
24
Encore properties, and the gross revenue generated from the WLV and Encore in Las Vegas alone
25
to date exceeds $20 billion. As a result, Plaintiff’s Trade Dress has attained worldwide recognition
26
and fame.
27
28
5
1 18. Based on its federal trademark registration and extensive use of the Plaintiff’s Trade
2 Dress, Plaintiff owns the exclusive right to use Plaintiff’s Trade Dress in Nevada and throughout
3 the United States in connection with its resort hotel and casino services, and related services and
4 goods including: entertainment services in the nature of live performances by singers, comedians,
5 dancers, and musical groups; resort hotel, restaurant, bar and lounge services; and health spa,
6 namely, cosmetic body care services; and beauty salons.
7 19. Based on Plaintiff's extensive and exclusive use of its Trade Dress in commerce,
8 Plaintiff also owns common law rights in its Trade Dress for the same services identified in
9 paragraph 18 above.
10 20. Plaintiff’s Trade Dress is non-functional and designed for aesthetic purposes, was
11 inherently distinctive at the time Plaintiff began using it in commerce, and remains inherently
12 distinctive to this day. Since the opening of the WLV in Las Vegas in 2005, Plaintiff’s Trade Dress
13 has become well known throughout the United States and abroad and has acquired secondary
14 meaning.
15 21. In addition to Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, Plaintiff is the author and owner of the
16 architectural design entitled “Wynn Resort Hotel Casino Architectural Design Construction
17 complete 2005,” which was created in 2005, and which is protected by U.S. Copyright Registration
18 No. VAu644-301 (“‘301 Reg.”). A copy of the ‘301 Reg. is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The
19 deposit materials for the ‘301 Reg. show the architectural design of the WLV resort hotel casino,
20 which has been visible to the public since at least 2005.
21 22. Since the WLV (and Encore) and its architectural design have been in public view
22 since at least 2005, Defendant has had access to Plaintiff’s novel architectural design since 2005.
23 DEFENDANT’S INFRINGING ACTIVITIES
24 23. Defendant is in the process of constructing its Resorts World Las Vegas hotel and
25 casino directly across the street from the WLV and the Encore in Las Vegas, Nevada. Recently,
26 Defendant has commenced installing curved, bronze glass, coupled with horizontal banding above
27 and between the lines of glass panes on its building, which has a concave facade.
28
6
1 Photographs of Defendant’s current construction appear below (see also Exhibit C below):
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
1 24. As evidenced by the photographs above, and in Exhibit C, Defendant is constructing
2 a substantially similar architectural design to that of the WLV with confusingly similar trade dress,
3 consisting of a concave facade, and curved, bronze glass, coupled with horizontal banding above
4 and between the lines of glass panes.
5 25. By virtue of Plaintiff’s ‘978 Reg. and ‘301 Reg., and the fact that the WLV and
6 Encore are across the street from Defendant’s new hotel and casino, at a minimum, Defendant has
7 been on actual notice of Plaintiff’s distinctive trade dress and copyright rights for many years, and
8 prior to commencing construction.
9 26. Defendant did not obtain Plaintiff’s consent or authorization to use the Wynn Trade
10 Dress or copyrighted architectural design in connection with resort, hotel, casino, entertainment,
11 lounge, bar and restaurant services. Instead, upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that
12 Defendant and/or its principal(s) visited a Las Vegas, Nevada architect and requested that they
13 produce an identical or substantially similar architectural design and trade dress for purposes of
14 trading upon the goodwill and reputation of Plaintiff’s famous trade dress and architectural design.
15 27. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that by using the infringing
16 trade dress in connection with soon-to-be competing resort hotel and casino services, as well as
17 Plaintiff’s copyrighted architectural design, Defendant was and is attempting to trade on the
18 goodwill associated with Plaintiff’s Trade Dress and infringe Plaintiff’s copyright rights. Media
19 outlets have noticed the striking similarity between the WLV and Encore on the one hand, and
20 Resorts World’s new construction on the other. See https://vitalvegas.com/resorts-world-is-
21 making-striking-progress/, attached hereto as Exhibit C, noting that: “[o]bservers have noted the
22 similarity between the look of Resorts World and that of Wynn and Encore, just across the street
23 (see below)”; “If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, Wynn should feel very flattered right
24 about now;” and “We’ve heard Genting Group, owners of Resorts World, may make a play to
25 purchase Wynn Resorts, so the similarity because (sic) the hotels could very well be intentional.”
26 In addition, there have been numerous instances of confusion as to an affiliation between
27 WLV/Encore and Resorts World expressed by at least Wynn employees, users of social media and
28 the media itself.
8
1 28. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that by using the infringing
2 trade dress in connection with soon-to-be competing resort hotel and casino services, Defendant
3 was and is intentionally attempting to create an association between its services and the services
4 associated with Plaintiff in a manner that is likely to harm the goodwill represented by Plaintiff’s
5 Trade Dress.
6 29. Defendant’s infringing trade dress creates a likelihood of confusion as to the source,
7 affiliation, connection to or sponsorship of the Plaintiff’s Trade Dress and accompanying services.
8 30. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant adopted the
9 Wynn trade dress to willfully trade on the goodwill and reputation of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress.
10 31. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant did not believe
11 or have reasonable grounds to believe that use of its infringing trade dress was a fair use or was
12 otherwise lawful.
13 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
14 (Federal Trade Dress Infringement – 15 U.S.C. § 1114)
15 32. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
16 herein.
17 33. Plaintiff is the owner of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, which is nonfunctional, and is
18 protected by the incontestable ‘978 Reg.
19 34. Plaintiff’s Trade Dress was inherently distinctive upon adoption and use and has
20 also acquired secondary meaning.
21 35. Defendant’s use of its almost identical trade dress for the architectural design of its
22 new Resorts World Las Vegas hotel and casino, which will offer the same or similar services to
23 those protected by the ‘978 Reg., is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive in
24 violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1).
25 36. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s infringement of Plaintiff’s federally-
26 registered trade dress, Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, monetary injury and
27 irreparable injury to its business, reputation, and goodwill, for which there is no adequate remedy at
28 law. As a result, in addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary
9
1 and permanent injunctive relief preventing Defendant’s continued infringement of Plaintiff's rights
2 in its Trade Dress.
3 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
4 (Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin – 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
6 herein.
7 38. Plaintiff is the owner of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, which is nonfunctional.
8 39. Plaintiff’s Trade Dress was inherently distinctive upon adoption and use and has
9 also acquired secondary meaning.
10 40. Defendant’s use of its almost identical trade dress for the architectural design of its
11 new Resorts World Las Vegas hotel and casino, which will offer the same or similar services to
12 those offered by Plaintiff, is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive in violation
13 of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
14 41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s infringement of Plaintiff’s federally-
15 registered trade dress, Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, monetary injury and
16 irreparable injury to its business, reputation, and goodwill, for which there is no adequate remedy at
17 law. As a result, in addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary
18 and permanent injunctive relief preventing Defendant’s continued infringement of Plaintiff’s rights
19 in its Trade Dress.
20 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
21 (Federal Trademark Dilution –15 U.S.C. § 1125(c))
23 herein.
24 43. Plaintiff’s Trade Dress is inherently distinctive.
25 44. Based on Plaintiff’s continuous and extensive use of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress,
26 Plaintiff’s Trade Dress are entitled to be recognized as famous under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
27 45. Defendant began using in commerce its infringing trade dress after Plaintiff’s Trade
28 Dress became famous.
10
1 46. Defendant’s unauthorized use of its infringing trade dress is likely to cause dilution
2 of the distinctive quality of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, the goods and services associated with the
3 Trade Dress, and the goodwill associated with Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, in violation of Section 43(c)
4 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
5 47. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant’s actions were
6 willful in nature, in that Defendant willfully intended to trade on Plaintiff's reputation or to dilute
7 Plaintiff’s Trade Dress.
8 48. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s actions and infringement, Plaintiff
9 has suffered, and will continue to suffer, monetary loss and irreparable injury to its business,
10 reputation, and goodwill.

11 49. In addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary and

12 permanent injunctive relief preventing Defendant’s continued infringement of Plaintiff’s rights in
14 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
15 (State Trademark Dilution—NRS 600.435)
17 herein.
18 51. Plaintiff’s Trade Dress is inherently distinctive or has acquired distinctiveness
19 through Plaintiff's extensive use.
20 52. Based on Plaintiff’s continuous and extensive use of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress in the
21 State of Nevada, Plaintiff’s Trade Dress is entitled to be recognized as famous under NRS
22 600.435(2).
23 53. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant began using, in
24 commerce, its infringing trade dress after Plaintiff’s Trade Dress became famous in the State of
25 Nevada.
26 54. Defendant’s unauthorized use of the its infringing trade dress is likely to cause
27 dilution of the distinctive quality of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, the goods and services associated with
28
11
1 the Trade Dress, and the goodwill associated with Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, in violation of NRS
2 600.435(1)(b).
3 55. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant’s actions were
4 willful in nature, in that Defendant willfully intended to cause dilution of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress or
5 willfully intended to trade on Plaintiff's reputation.
6 56. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s actions and infringement, Plaintiff
7 has suffered, and will continue to suffer, monetary loss and irreparable injury to its business,
8 reputation, and goodwill.
9 57. In addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary and
10 permanent injunctive relief preventing Defendant’s continued infringement of Plaintiff’s rights in


12 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
13 (Copyright Infringement –17 U.S.C. § 501 et seq.)
15 herein.
16 59. Defendant has committed copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 501 et seq.,
17 directly, by inducement, or by way of contributory liability, by knowingly aiding, causing, or
18 committing, the unauthorized practice or execution of one or more exclusive rights owned by
19 Plaintiff set forth in 17 U.S.C. § 106, said exclusive rights having been perfected by the ‘301 Reg.
20 60. On information and belief, Defendant’s direct and induced infringements are and
21 have been knowing and willful. By this unlawful copying, use, and distribution, Defendant has
22 violated Plaintiff’s exclusive rights under 17 U.S.C. § 106.
23 61. Defendant has realized (and/or will realize) unjust profits, gains and advantages as a
24 proximate result of its infringement.
25 62. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s direct and indirect willful copyright
26 infringement, Plaintiff has suffered (and/or will suffer), monetary loss and irreparable injury to its
27 business, reputation, and goodwill.
28
12
1 63. Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendant, in amounts to be determined at trial,
2 the damages Plaintiff has sustained and will sustain, and any gains, profits, and advantages obtained
3 by Defendant as a result of Defendant’s acts of infringement and Defendant’s use and publication
4 of the copied work, as well as temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief preventing
5 Defendant’s continued infringement of Plaintiff’s rights in its copyrighted work.
6 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
7 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that the Court grant the following relief:
8 A. That the Court enter judgment against Defendant, finding that:
9 1. Defendant infringed Plaintiff’s rights in its federally registered Trade Dress
10 (‘978 Reg.”) in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114;

11 2. Defendant infringed Plaintiff’s rights in its Trade Dress in violation of 15

12 U.S.C. § 1125(a);
13 3. Defendant infringed and diluted Plaintiff’s Trade Dress in violation of 15
14 U.S.C. § 1125(c)
15 4. Defendant infringed and diluted Plaintiff’s Trade Dress in violation of NRS
16 600.435;
17 5. Defendant infringed Plaintiff’s copyright rights in the ‘301 Reg. in violation
18 17 U.S.C. § 501 et seq.;
19 B. That the Court enter judgment against Defendant that the above acts, A(1)-(3), were
20 willful and intentional making this an exceptional case;
21 C. That the Court issue a temporary, preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting
22 Defendant, Defendant’s respective officers, agents, servants, employees and/or all persons acting in
23 concert or participation with Defendant, from (1) using or contributing or causing the use of
24 Plaintiff’s Trade Dress or any confusingly similar variations thereof, or any other trade dress or
25 trademarks or service marks that are confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s Trade Dress; and (2) directly
26 or indirectly using, or contributing or aiding the copying or use of Plaintiff’s copyrighted
27 architectural work protected by the ‘310 Reg.;
28
13
1 D. That the Court enter an order requiring Defendant to deliver to Plaintiff for
2 destruction any and all advertising and promotional materials in Defendant’s possession, custody or
3 control, which contain the infringement trade dress and infringing copyrighted material;
4 E. That the Court enter an order requiring Defendant to remove any materials or goods
5 that constituted infringing trade dress from its Resorts World Las Vegas hotel and casino that is
6 currently under construction;
7 F. That Plaintiff be awarded damages for Defendant’s trade dress infringement,
8 dilution, and copyright infringement;
9 G. That Plaintiff be awarded all profits resulting from Defendant’s trade dress
10 infringement, dilution, and copyright infringement;

11 H. That Defendant be ordered to account for and disgorge to Plaintiff all amounts by
12 which the Defendant has been unjustly enriched by reason of the unlawful acts complained of;
13 I. That Plaintiff be awarded damages resulting from Defendant’s infringement, unfair
14 competition, and dilution in accordance with the provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 1117 and NRS 600.430;
15 J. That damages resulting from Defendant’s infringement, unfair competition, and
16 dilution under the Lanham Act and the Nevada Revised Statutes be trebled due to Defendant’s
17 willfulness, in accordance with the provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 1117 and NRS 600.430;
18 K. That the Court issue an award of actual damages and any profits of the Defendant
19 attributable to the infringing acts alleged herein, consistent with 17 U.S.C. § 504(a)(1), or, upon
20 election, an award of statutory damages consistent with 17 U.S.C. § 504(a)(2);
21 L. That Plaintiff be awarded exemplary or punitive damages in an amount appropriate
22 to punish Defendant and to make an example of the Defendant to the community;
23 M. That Plaintiff be awarded an amount sufficient to reimburse Plaintiff for costs of
24 corrective advertising;
25 N. An award of full costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees against Defendant pursuant to
26 15 U.S.C. § 1117, 17 U.S.C. § 505, and NRS 600.430;
27 O. For pre-judgment interest on all infringement and any other appropriate damages;
28 and
14
1 P. For such other or further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
2 DATED this 21st day of December, 2018.

4
By: /s/ Michael D. Rounds
5 MICHAEL D. ROUNDS, ESQ.
MATTHEW D. FRANCIS, ESQ.
100 North City Parkway, Suite 1600
8 Las Vegas, NV 89106-4614
Telephone: 702.382.2101
9 Facsimile: 702.382.8135
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15
1 JURY DEMAND
2 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Plaintiff Wynn Resorts Holdings, LLC hereby demands a
3 jury trial on all issues triable by jury.
4 DATED this 21st day of December, 2018.

6
By: /s/ Michael D. Rounds
7 MICHAEL D. ROUNDS, ESQ.
MATTHEW D. FRANCIS, ESQ.
100 North City Parkway, Suite 1600
10 Las Vegas, NV 89106-4614
Telephone: 702.382.2101
11 Facsimile: 702.382.8135

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
1
2 1. United States Patent and Trademark Office Reg. No. 3,195,978 1 Page
3
2. United States Copyright Office Certificate of Registration VAu644-301 14 Pages
4
5 3. Resorts World is Making Striking Progress (article) 7 Pages
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
17

Wynn Resorts vs. Resorts World Las Vegas Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Wynn Resorts vs. Resorts World Las Vegas Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 2:18-cv-02410-JAD-CWH Document 1 Filed 12/21/18 Page 1 of 17

MICHAEL D. ROUNDS, ESQ.

11 Attorneys for Plaintiff Wynn Resorts Holdings, LLC

17 v. (1) Trademark Infringement under 15 U.S.C.

1 NATURE OF THE CASE

15 and abroad for many years.

19 affiliated with, sponsored by or associated with Plaintiff, when it is not.

20 5. Additionally, the architectural design embodied in Defendant’s Resorts World Las

23 and common law Trade Dress.

25 preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, and other additional relief.

28 business in Las Vegas, Nevada.

3 9. Resorts World registered to do business in Nevada with the Nevada Secretary of

4 State on March 25, 2013, and is listed as Entity No. E0152172013-1.

5 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

14 Wynn and Encore buildings.

19 PLAINTIFF'S RIGHTS IN ITS TRADE DRESS AND COPYRIGHT

23 the finest hotels in the world.

4 the WLV and Encore appear below:

11 of 2019. See http://www.encorebostonharbor.com/. A rendering of the Encore Boston Harbor

12 appears below, as does a photograph of the construction of the resort:

6 namely, cosmetic body care services; and beauty salons.

20 which has been visible to the public since at least 2005.

23 DEFENDANT’S INFRINGING ACTIVITIES

1 24. As evidenced by the photographs above, and in Exhibit C, Defendant is constructing

4 and between the lines of glass panes.

8 prior to commencing construction.

20 Resorts World’s new construction on the other. See https://vitalvegas.com/resorts-world-is-

26 In addition, there have been numerous instances of confusion as to an affiliation between

28 the media itself.

13 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

14 (Federal Trade Dress Infringement – 15 U.S.C. § 1114)

18 protected by the incontestable ‘978 Reg.

20 also acquired secondary meaning.

24 violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1).

25 36. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s infringement of Plaintiff’s federally-

28 law. As a result, in addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary

2 in its Trade Dress.

3 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

4 (Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin – 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))

7 38. Plaintiff is the owner of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, which is nonfunctional.

9 also acquired secondary meaning.

14 41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s infringement of Plaintiff’s federally-

17 law. As a result, in addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary

19 in its Trade Dress.

20 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

21 (Federal Trademark Dilution –15 U.S.C. § 1125(c))

24 43. Plaintiff’s Trade Dress is inherently distinctive.

28 Dress became famous.

4 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).

7 Plaintiff’s Trade Dress.

10 reputation, and goodwill.

11 49. In addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary and

12 permanent injunctive relief preventing Defendant’s continued infringement of Plaintiff’s rights in

13 Plaintiff’s Trade Dress.

14 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

15 (State Trademark Dilution—NRS 600.435)

18 51. Plaintiff’s Trade Dress is inherently distinctive or has acquired distinctiveness

19 through Plaintiff's extensive use.

5 willfully intended to trade on Plaintiff's reputation.

8 reputation, and goodwill.

9 57. In addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary and

10 permanent injunctive relief preventing Defendant’s continued infringement of Plaintiff’s rights in

11 Plaintiff’s Trade Dress.