May 11, 1987 saw another action in US District Court New York when Drifters member Rick Sheppard

moved for stay in favor of prior state court action pending between him and Larry Marshak." Motion Denied" The district Court, Milton Pollack, Senior District Judge, held that no exceptional circumstances existed that would warrant stay on abstention grounds, particularly in view of dormancy of prior parallel state action. In the backround of this case the Plaintiff known as Larry marshak at the time a manager of another performing group known as The Drifters claimed to be owner of a federally registered trademark for vocal and instrumental music rendered by the group and for the goodwill associated with the name The Drifters. Marshak filed his suit on December 31 1986. In his Amended Complaint he made three claims: for infringement of his trademark in violation of the Lanham Act, The Lanham Act of 1946, also known as the Trademark Act (15 U.S.C.A. 1051 et seq ., ch. 540, 60 Stat. 427 [1988 & Supp. V 1993]), is a federal statute that r egulates the use of Trademarks in commercial activity. Trademarks are distinctiv e pictures, words, and other symbols or devices used by businesses to identify t heir goods and services. The Lanham Act gives trademark users exclusive rights t o their marks, thereby protecting the time and money invested in those marks. Th e act also serves to reduce consumer confusion in the identification of goods an d services. The Lanham Act was not the first federal legislation on trademarks, but it was t he first comprehensive federal legislation. Before the Lanham Act, most of trade mark law was regulated by a variety of state laws. for unfair compettition; and for infringment under state law. Marshak at the time made several request for declaratory and injunctive relief, plus damages. He requested a decree of the court that defendant Sheppard had infringed upon his trademark and that they had falsely promoted their entertainment services. He further requested that the court would enjoin the defendant and his associates from using the name The Drifters or simular words to promote their own services. Lastly he asked for treble damages and cost to be paid. In an Amended answer to the Amended complaint, Sheppard admits at the time he was engaged in the live entertainment industry as a performer in a group known as Rick Sheppard and The Drifters. Sheppard interposes several affirmatives defenses to the allegations by Marshak. Sheppard claimed that Marshaks trademark was invalid in that it was first obtained under false pretenses and then

granted "incontestability" status pursuant to U.S.C.1065 under further false pretenses. He also asserted the defense of laches that he had allegedly used th name "Rick Sheppard and the Drifters" openly and continuously for over a period of ten years. Lastly Sheppard asserted that the plaintiff, Marshak with anothe filed two suits against him and another in New York State Court in 1975 and 1978, over essentially the same subject matter. In all this Sheppard had asserted eight counter claims against plainfiff marshak to include violations of antitrust, trademark law, unfair competition, malicious prosecution, defamation, inducement to breach of contract, and interference with business relationships. (Corner Talk Report) for related info on the Drifters Legends: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=162862227105852for The Drifters Legends Website: http://theofficialdrifters.com/drifterslegends.php