Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc.

#: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 1 of 19 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

THE PRECINCT, INC., an Ohio corporation, Plaintiff, vs. MWS, LLC, a Missouri Limited Liability Company D/B/A THE PRECINCT Serve: John Pawloski 1900 Locust Street, Suite 302 Saint Louis, MO 63103 Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT Plaintiff The Precinct, Inc. (The Precinct or Plaintiff), by and through its undersigned attorneys, and for its complaint for trademark infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin against defendant MWS LLC (Defendant), states as follows: INTRODUCTION This is a trademark infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin suit brought against Defendant. The Precinct is and has, since 1981, owned and operated the nationally-renowned PRECINCT restaurant located in Cincinnati, Ohio. During this time, The PRECINCT has been acclaimed by both national media outlets and those in the culinary industry as one of the highest regarded and recognized restaurants in the United States. The Precinct has obtained a federal registration for PRECINCT for restaurant and bar services, which has achieved a nationwide reputation of the highest quality in restaurant services. Defendant, despite being intimately familiar with the high quality dining experience and

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 2 of 19 PageID #: 2

impeccable reputation of the PRECINCT restaurant, has knowingly adopted a nearly identical trademark in order to confuse the public into the mistaken belief that it is affiliated, franchised, sponsored by, or otherwise associated with the iconic PRECINCT restaurant. Despite prior demands that it cease these infringing activities, Defendant refuses and continues to improperly use the term Precinct to brand its restaurant and bar services in St. Louis, Missouri when it has no lawful right or endorsement from Plaintiff to do so. Such use constitutes willful trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et. seq., as well as violations of Missouri common law trademark infringement and unfair competition. PARTIES 1. The Precinct, Inc. is, and at all times material hereto has been, a corporation

organized and existing under the laws of the State of Ohio, maintaining a place of business located at 700 Walnut Street, Suite 200, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. The Precinct is an affiliate of Jeff Ruby Culinary Entertainment, Inc., which also owns and operates a number of highly-rated and recognized restaurants, including Jeff Rubys Steakhouse, Precinct, Carlo & Johnny and Waterfront, and is in the common ownership of Jeff Ruby, one of the nations preeminent restaurateurs. 2. The Precinct is the owner of certain intellectual property associated with its

restaurant and bar services, including the federally registered trademark PRECINCT, as is more specifically identified below. 3. Upon information and belief, defendant MWS, LLC (Defendant) is, and at all

times material hereto has been, an entity existing under the laws of the State of Missouri, having a principal office and place of business located at 1900 Locust Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri.

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 3 of 19 PageID #: 3

4.

Upon information and belief, members of Defendant include Mark Winfield and

Jim Edmonds. Upon further information and belief, Edmonds has knowingly participated in and purposefully directed the infringing activities of Defendant complained of herein. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. This action arises under the Federal Trademark Act of 1946, as amended, 15

U.S.C. 1051 et seq. The claims set forth herein are for trademark infringement in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114(1); unfair competition and false designation of origin in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a); and violations of common and state law rights pursuant to Missouri law. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter and the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a) and (b), and 28 U.S.C. 1367(a). 6. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) because a

substantial part of the events giving rise to this action occurred in this District, including the offer and sale of infringing restaurant and bar services (Infringing Services) to residents of this District. JEFF RUBYS FAMOUS PRECINCT RESTAURANT 7. As noted, the PRECINCT restaurant and bar is the flagship in a stable of fine-

dining and drinking establishments operated by Jeff Ruby. The iconic PRECINCT restaurant is Cincinnatis longest continually-running fine-dining establishment having first opened its doors in 1981. 8. The PRECINCT restaurant and bar was born in the former Cincinnati Police

Patrol House Number 6. True to its namesake, the PRECINCT features a dcor and dress focused on its police headquarters heritage with historic police memorabilia displayed throughout the facility, true and correct depictions of which are attached hereto as Exhibit A.

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 4 of 19 PageID #: 4

9.

In 2011, the PRECINCT opened a large bar area in the restaurant, with

numerous large screen televisions aimed specifically at sports fans. The PRECINCT bar offers a casual atmosphere and menu, with dcor featuring both police and sporting memorabilia. 10. All of the Ruby restaurants regularly cross-advertise the other Ruby

establishments, including the famous PRECINCT restaurant and bar. 11. Consistency and highest quality are hallmarks of the experience customers come

to expect at the PRECINCT restaurant and bar. To ensure that the PRECINCT retains its focus on the highest quality in dining and entertainment experiences, Jeff Ruby and The Precinct have made a conscious business decision not to franchise or otherwise license the PRECINCT trade name to others. 12. Long prior to the acts of Defendant complained of herein, and as detailed above,

Plaintiff commenced use of the trademark PRECINCT in connection with restaurant and bar services to identify and distinguish its quality restaurant services. The Precinct has secured a federal trademark registration for PRECINCT, U.S. Registration No. 4,318,443, for restaurant and bar services, in International Class 43, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 13. The Precinct also owns certain common law rights in, and in addition to, the

above federal registration for the term PRECINCT, with and without other elements and terms, collectively referred to herein with the above-referenced federal trademark registration as the PRECINCT Mark. 14. The PRECINCT Mark is inherently distinctive and nationally recognized by

members of the consuming public and restaurant trade alike as an indicator of superb restaurant and bar services uniquely associated with Plaintiff.

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 5 of 19 PageID #: 5

15.

For over three decades, Plaintiff has continually used the PRECINCT Mark in

connection with the offer and sale of its restaurant and bar services, such that the PRECINCT Mark uniquely identifies and distinguishes Plaintiffs restaurant and bar service from others in the restaurant and bar industries. 16. As a result of its attention to detail and providing its customers with unparalleled

service, the PRECINCT is nationally renowned in the restaurant industry. For example, the PRECINCT was recently recognized as one of the top 100 restaurants in the United States by online reservations website www.opentable.com; as one of Americas 100 Best Wine Restaurants by WINE ENTHUSIAST magazine; as one of the top 10 steakhouses in the United States by USA TODAY; as one of the top 25 steakhouses according to PLAYBOY magazine, one of the top ten steakhouses in the United States by www.gayot.com; and one of the top steakhouses in Cincinnati by CIGAR AFICIONADO. 17. Jeff Rubys PRECINCT restaurant and bar routinely ranks higher than many

other steakhouses in quintessential American steak cities like New York City and Chicago by the gold-standard rating agency Zagat. A sampling of a few recent awards and distinctions received by the PRECINCT restaurant are attached hereto as Exhibit C. 18. Each year, The Precinct expends substantial financial resources to advertise and

promote its widely regarded PRECINCT restaurant to consumers across the United States through extensive promotion in print media, radio and television. As a result, Plaintiffs PRECINCT restaurant and bar has acquired a nation-wide reputation and associated goodwill. 19. Earlier this year, the PRECINCT was featured on Chef Wanted with Anne

Burrell, on the widely-watched Food Network channel.

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 6 of 19 PageID #: 6

20.

Plaintiffs promotion of the PRECINCT restaurant has extended to consumers

residing in the St. Louis Metropolitan area. More particularly, in addition to national media exposure that is equally available to St. Louis residents, Ruby has participated in the Taste of St. Louis events, where he has promoted the PRECINCT restaurant to St. Louis residents. In addition, Jeff Rubys Steakhouse has previously served St. Louis patrons during 2010. Notably, despite being only open for a brief period of time, Rubys restaurant received critical acclaim from St. Louis consumers and media, including being identified as an A-List Winner in 2010 by ST. LOUIS MAGAZINE. Finally, Jeff Rubys webpage also affords St. Louis residents the option of purchasing gift cards online for use at any Jeff Ruby restaurantincluding the PRECINCT restaurant. See http://www.shop.jeffruby.com. 21. Further, the promotional advertisements utilized at Jeff Rubys Steakhouse in

St. Louis specifically drew customers attention to Jeff Rubys other fine-dining establishmentsincluding the iconic PRECINCT restaurant. 22. As a result of its national reputation for highest quality, the PRECINCT Mark has

achieved widespread consumer recognition and nation-wide goodwill as a unique indicator of restaurant and bar services of unparalleled quality. 23. As a result of the extensive reputation achieved by the PRECINCT restaurant,

the PRECINCT Mark has become extremely well known, famous, and of incalculable value to Plaintiff with respect to the providing the highest quality in restaurant and bar services. DEFENDANTS INFRINGING CONDUCT 24. As is more fully set forth below, Defendant has embarked on a deliberate and

willful campaign to circumvent and misappropriate Plaintiffs exclusive rights in the PRECINCT Mark and the goodwill associated therewith.

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 7 of 19 PageID #: 7

25.

Edmonds, a member of Defendant, was a professional baseball player who spent

eight (8) years as a member of the St. Louis Cardinals baseball club. During that time, Edmonds spent several weeks each year playing baseball in Cincinnati against the Cardinals division rival Cincinnati Reds. 26. Edmonds spent event more time in Cincinnati during 2010, when he was

employed as a player for the Cincinnati Reds. 27. During his time with the Cardinals and Reds in Cincinnati, Edmonds became

uniquely and intimately aware of Plaintiffs iconic PRECINCT restaurant. 28. Upon information and belief, Edmonds has dined at the PRECINCT restaurant

several times while in Cincinnati. 29. Edmonds previously operated a restaurant in downtown St. Louis that went by the

trade name Jim Edmonds 15 Steakhouse. 30. Upon information and belief, on or about August 31, 2013, Defendant and/or

Edmonds decided to modify and rebrand the Jim Edmonds 15 Steakhouse. Thereafter, on or about October 14, 2013, Defendant re-opened the old Jim Edmonds 15 steakhouse as THE PRECINCT. 31. Defendant has, in advertising and promotion of its restaurant, further identified

itself with Plaintiff through the domain name www.precinctstl.com. 32. In so doing, Defendant improperly attempts to give consumers the mistaken

impression or belief that it is a St. Louis location or franchisee associated with, licensed or funded by the PRECINCT restaurant. True and correct copies of Defendants advertising and promotional materials identifying the URL www.precinctstl.com wherein Defendant identifies itself as THE PRECINCT are attached hereto as Exhibit D.

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 8 of 19 PageID #: 8

33.

Defendant also maintains an active presence on social media, where, through

numerous accounts on Facebook and Twitter, it again improperly creates an association in the minds of consumers between its THE PRECINCT establishment and the iconic PRECINCT restaurant. True and correct copies of Defendants infringing Facebook and Twitter pages are attached hereto as Exhibits E and F respectively. 34. Moreover, the trade dress of Defendants Precinct establishment is undoubtedly

based upon that used by Plaintiffs in its iconic PRECINCT restaurant and bar. Of all the dcor and dress Defendant could have chosen for its restaurant, it selected police memorabilia; it has also now installed wide-screen televisions to attract sports fans, thus adopting not only Plaintiffs name, but its trade dress as well. 35. On or about October 25, 2013, Plaintiff sent Defendant a letter demanding that it

immediately cease and refrain from any further unauthorized use or infringement of the PRECINCT Mark. A true and correct copy of that October 25 letter is attached as Exhibit G. As noted therein, Defendant was advised that there have already been instances of actual consumer confusion regarding whether Defendants restaurant was owned and/or operated by Jeff Ruby, or whether it is intended to be a replacement for Jeff Rubys Steakhouse. 36. Despite requesting that it provide some response, Defendant has not responded to

The Precincts demands that Defendant cease the infringing activities referenced herein, (such activities collectively referred to as the Infringing Activities). 37. Through subsequent investigation, Plaintiff has confirmed that Defendant

continues to hold itself out as being affiliated or associated with the famous PRECINCT restaurant by continuing its Infringing Activities. 38. Defendants acts are likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to the

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 9 of 19 PageID #: 9

source or origin of Defendants restaurant and bar services sold and promoted under the PRECINCT Mark. Indeed, despite being open now for little over a month, Plaintiff has already received numerous reports of consumer confusion or suggestion that Defendants THE PRECINCT restaurant is somehow affiliated with the PRECINCT restaurantwhich it is not. 39. Confusion is also likely because Defendants infringing services are being

promoted, offered and sold through the same channels of trade as Plaintiffs famed PRECINCT-branded restaurant and bar services. 40. Defendant has adopted an identical PRECINCT mark, or a confusingly similar

facsimile thereof (such mark, domain name, social media name and other designations referenced herein collectively referred to as the Infringing PRECINCT Mark), to promote services sold and/or offered for sale in and through interstate commerce, and Defendants use has a substantial impact on interstate commerce and adversely affects Plaintiffs interstate business and nationwide reputation in its PRECINCT restaurant. 41. Defendant is not licensed by The Precinct and is not authorized to provide or offer

services or goods under its Infringing PRECINCT Mark. 42. The activities of Defendant complained of herein were done willfully, with

express knowledge that such conduct was and is in direct contravention of Plaintiffs rights in the PRECINCT Mark and other proprietary rights, and are designed to confuse, mislead and deceive the purchasing public. COUNT I (Federal Trademark Infringement (15 U.S.C. 1114)) 43. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporate the allegations contained in the preceding

paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein.

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 10 of 19 PageID #: 10

44.

The PRECINCT Mark is in full force and effect, has been continuously and

widely used throughout the United States, and emanates nationwide goodwill and reputation as a result of the extensive recognition received by the iconic PRECINCT restaurant. 45. The PRECINCT Mark is inherently distinctive and extremely well known to the

trade and members of the purchasing public alike. The public associates and uniquely identifies the PRECINCT Mark with The PRECINCT restaurant. 46. By virtue of the nationwide goodwill and reputation for highest quality, the

PRECINCT Mark has developed commercial significance in the minds of the purchasing public. The services offered and sold under the PRECINCT Mark are immediately identified by the purchasing public as being associated with Plaintiff and its famous PRECINCT restaurant. 47. Defendants willful unauthorized use of its Infringing PRECINCT Mark is likely

to cause confusion or mistake in the minds of the purchasing public as to the source or origin of Defendants goods and services, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114(1). 48. The activities of Defendant complained of herein constitute willful and intentional

infringement of Plaintiffs PRECINCT Mark, in total disregard of Plaintiffs exclusive rights, and were commenced and have continued in spite of Defendants knowledge that the use of the PRECINCT Mark, or any copy or colorable imitation thereof, was and is in direct contravention of Plaintiffs exclusive rights. 49. Defendants unauthorized use of its Infringing PRECINCT Mark is greatly and

irreparably damaging to Plaintiff in the form of: (a) loss in income; (b) lessening and dilution of the well-known PRECINCT Mark; (c) interference with Plaintiffs ability to exploit its own licensing rights; (d) confusion in the marketplace as to the duly authorized source of the restaurant and bar services sold and offered for sale under the PRECINCT Mark; and (e)

SLC70919103

10

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 11 of 19 PageID #: 11

impairment of the extensive nationwide reputation and goodwill Plaintiff has established in its PRECINCT Mark, which, if not enjoined, will continue to cause irreparable damage to the rights of Plaintiff and to its business, reputation, and goodwill in and to the PRECINCT Mark. 50. Defendants infringing use of the identical term PRECINCT in connection with

its advertising, promotion and sale of restaurant and bar services amounts to counterfeiting under 15 U.S.C. 1116(d)(1)(B), as the same is a spurious designation substantially indistinguishable from Plaintiffs well-known PRECINCT Mark. 51. Defendants intentional misappropriation of the term PRECINCT to brand its

restaurant and bar services, knowing the same to be a infringing and counterfeit mark, entitles Plaintiff to treble damages or profits, whichever is greater, together with reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(b)(1). 52. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and Plaintiffs damages cannot yet be

fully determined. 53. Defendants willful and intentional infringement of the PRECINCT Mark as

alleged herein is an exceptional case, entitling Plaintiff to treble its actual damages and to an award of attorneys fees under 15 U.S.C. 1117(a) and 1117(b). COUNT II (Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin (15 U.S.C. 1125(a)) 54. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporate the allegations contained in the preceding

paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein. 55. The PRECINCT Mark is inherently distinctive, has been used continuously

throughout the United States for over thirty (30) years, and is extremely well known to the trade and members of the purchasing public. The public associates and uniquely identifies the PRECINCT Mark with Plaintiff.
SLC70919103

11

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 12 of 19 PageID #: 12

56.

Defendants adoption and use of its Infringing PRECINCT Mark, without

Plaintiffs consent, in conjunction with its offer and sale of infringing restaurant and bar services, constitutes unfair competition and tends to falsely represent or suggest that Defendants goods and/or services originate from Plaintiff, or that said goods and/or services have been sponsored, franchised by, approved, or licensed by Plaintiff, or that they are in some way affiliated or connected with Plaintiff. 57. Defendants improper adoption and use of its Infringing PRECINCT Mark further

presents a likelihood of confusion, misleading and deceiving Defendants customers, purchasers and members of the public as to the source or origin of Defendants goods and/or services, which will cause said persons to mistakenly believe that such goods and/or services have been sponsored, approved, authorized or licensed by Plaintiff, or that they are in some way affiliated with or franchised by Plaintiff, all in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a). 58. Defendants conduct was done willfully, with full knowledge of the falsity of

such designations of origin and false description or representations, and with the express intent to cause confusion, mislead and/or deceive the purchasing public. Defendant intends to misappropriate and improperly trade upon the nationally-known reputation and goodwill associated with the iconic PRECINCT restaurant and the PRECINCT Mark. 59. Defendants unauthorized use of the PRECINCT Mark is greatly and irreparably

damaging to Plaintiff in the form of: (a) loss in income; (b) lessening and dilution of the ability of Plaintiffs PRECINCT Mark to serve as a unique identifier for Plaintiffs well-known and highest quality services; (c) interfering with Plaintiffs ability to exploit its own rights; (d) confusion in the marketplace as to the duly authorized source or origin of the goods and/or services offered under the PRECINCT Mark; and (e) impairment of the extensive nationwide

SLC70919103

12

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 13 of 19 PageID #: 13

reputation and goodwill Plaintiff has established in its PRECINCT Mark. If not enjoined, Defendants unauthorized use will continue to cause irreparable damage to the rights of Plaintiff in and to its famous PRECINCT Mark, and the reputation and nationwide goodwill established therein. 60. determined. COUNT III (Missouri Statutory and Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition under Mo. Rev. Stat. 417.056) 61. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations contained in the preceding Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Plaintiffs damages are not yet fully

paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth herein. This is a substantial and related claim under the Trademark Laws of the United States, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq. 62. The acts of Defendant complained of herein constitute common law trademark

infringement and unfair competition in violation of the common law of the State of Missouri. 63. Defendants acts have created, and unless enjoined by this Court will continue to

create, a likelihood of confusion and deception of the consuming public, causing irreparable injury to Plaintiff for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. 64. Defendants unauthorized use of the PRECINCT Mark is greatly and irreparably

damaging to Plaintiff in the form of: (a) loss in income; (b) lessening and dilution of the famous PRECINCT Mark; (c) interference with Plaintiffs ability to exploit its own rights or otherwise control the quality of the goods or services offered thereunder; (d) confusion in the marketplace as to the duly authorized source or origin of the restaurant and bar services bearing the PRECINCT Mark; and (e) impairment of the significant nationwide reputation and goodwill Plaintiff possesses in its well-known PRECINCT Mark. If not enjoined, Defendants
SLC70919103

13

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 14 of 19 PageID #: 14

unauthorized use will continue to cause irreparable damage to the rights of Plaintiff in and to its well-known PRECINCT Mark and to its respective business, reputation, and goodwill of the iconic PRECINCT restaurant. 65. Defendant has acted with full knowledge of Plaintiffs longstanding use of, and

statutory and common law rights in, the PRECINCT Mark, and with utter disregard to the likelihood of confusion and deception of the public created by its improper activities. 66. Defendants infringing actions demonstrate an intentional, willful and malicious

intent to trade on the extensive nationwide goodwill and reputation associated with the PRECINCT Mark, to the great and irreparable injury of Plaintiff. 67. As a result of Defendants acts, Plaintiff has been injured and is entitled to

permanent injunctive relief. COUNT IV (Missouri Statutory Trademark Dilution Under Mo. Rev. Stat. 417.061) 68. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations contained in the preceding

paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth herein. This is a substantial and related claim under the Trademark Laws of the United States, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq. 69. Plaintiff has extensively and continuously used and promoted the PRECINCT

Mark in the United States, and the PRECINCT Mark has become a well-known, indeed nationally renowned, symbol of Plaintiffs restaurant and bar services well before Defendant initiated any intent to offer or sell its infringing and counterfeit services. 70. Defendants unauthorized use of the PRECINCT Mark, or terms confusingly

similar thereto, dilutes and is likely to dilute the distinctiveness of Plaintiffs well-known PRECINCT Mark by eroding the publics exclusive identification of the Mark with Plaintiffs iconic PRECINCT restaurant, and/or by otherwise lessening the capacity of Plaintiffs 14

SLC70919103

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 15 of 19 PageID #: 15

PRECINCT Mark to identify and distinguish Plaintiffs highest quality restaurant and bar services. 71. Defendants actions are likely to cause injury to the business reputation of The

Precinct and potential degradation of the extensive nationwide reputation and goodwill attained by the iconic PRECINCT restaurant. 72. Defendants actions demonstrate an intentional, willful and malicious intent to

trade on the nationwide reputation and goodwill associated with Plaintiffs PRECINCT Mark, or to cause dilution to the Mark, to the great and irreparable injury of Plaintiff. 73. Defendant is causing and will continue to cause irreparable injury to Plaintiffs

national reputation and goodwill, and further dilution of the distinctiveness and significant value of Plaintiffs well-known PRECINCT Mark, in violation of the Missouri anti-dilution statute, Mo. Rev. Stat. 417.061(1). Plaintiff is therefore entitled to permanent injunctive relief. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that: 1. Defendant, and any of the agents, servants, employees, attorneys, representatives,

licensees, franchisees, successors, assigns and all persons, consultants, subcontractors, affiliates, firms or corporations in active concert or participation with Defendant be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from: (a) directly or indirectly infringing Plaintiffs above-described PRECINCT

Mark in any manner, and specifically; (i) using the PRECINCT Mark or any marks confusingly similar

thereto, or any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of the same, in connection with the sale or offering to sell any restaurant or bar services, and/or

SLC70919103

15

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 16 of 19 PageID #: 16

related or ancillary goods or services, or in the promotion, publicizing or advertising thereof, including by way of social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin or any other social media or online outlet; (ii) applying the PRECINCT Mark or any such reproduction,

counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation, to any label, sign, print, or advertisement used in connection with the sale or offering to sell of any restaurant or bar services and/or related or ancillary goods and services; (b) using any trademarks, service marks, trade names, logos or designs,

including but not limited to PRECINCT, or any other term that falsely suggests an affiliation with Plaintiff, or that is likely to confuse, mislead, or deceive purchasers, Defendants customers, or members of the consuming public that Defendants unauthorized restaurant and bar services, competing and related or ancillary goods and services advertised, sold and/or offered for sale by Defendant originate from Plaintiff, or that said goods and services have been sponsored, approved, or licensed by or associated with Plaintiff or are in some way connected or affiliated with Plaintiff; (c) engaging in any conduct that tends falsely to represent that, or is likely to

confuse, mislead, or deceive purchasers, Defendants customers, and/or members of the consuming public to believe that the actions of Defendant are connected with Plaintiff, are sponsored, approved, or licensed by Plaintiff, or are in any way connected or affiliated with Plaintiff; (d) affixing, applying, annexing or using in connection with the offer or sale

of restaurant or bar services and/or related goods and services any false description or representation, including but not limited to PRECINCT, or any other words or symbols

SLC70919103

16

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 17 of 19 PageID #: 17

that tend to falsely suggest or represent an affiliation or relationship between Defendant and Plaintiff; (e) (f) otherwise competing unfairly with Plaintiff in any manner; infringing or diluting Plaintiffs PRECINCT Mark or damaging Plaintiffs

nationwide goodwill and reputation in the PRECINCT Mark or Jeff Rubys PRECINCT restaurant; (g) engaging in unfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts, practices

and/or unfair or deceptive practices in the conduct of trade or commerce; (h) destroying or otherwise disposing of: (i) any products or things which reproduce, copy, counterfeit, imitate

or bear the PRECINCT Mark, trade names, logos, or designs; and (ii) any sales, supplier or customer journals, ledgers, invoices,

purchases, orders, inventory control, documents, bank records, catalogues, recordings of any type whatsoever, and all other business records and documents, which concern the selling or offering for sale of any goods or services in conjunction with the PRECINCT Mark, or any confusingly similar variations thereof; 2. Defendant be required to deliver to Plaintiff for destruction any and all stationery,

circulars, catalogs, charts, brochures, business cards, advertising materials, labels, packages, signs, and all materials in their possession or under their control which contain marks, names, logos or designs confusing similar to the PRECINCT Mark; 3. Defendant be required to account for and pay to Plaintiff all profits and money

damages resulting from Defendants infringing and unfair activities, and that the award of money

SLC70919103

17

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 18 of 19 PageID #: 18

damages to Plaintiff be trebled and enhanced as provided for under 15 U.S.C. 1117(a) and/or (b) and other applicable law due to Defendants willful infringement; 4. Defendant be required, upon a finding by the Court that its Infringing PRECINCT

Mark is a counterfeit mark, to pay Plaintiff all monetary remedies available under 15 U.S.C. 1171(b), as well as Plaintiffs reasonable attorneys fees, as provided therein; 5. Defendant be required to notify its customers and the purchasing public that

goods and services sold or offered for sale by them under the PRECINCT Mark are in no way connected with, sponsored, licensed franchised or endorsed by Plaintiff, and that Plaintiff has the exclusive right to the use, and to license, the use of the PRECINCT Mark; 6. Defendant be directed to file with the Court and serve upon Plaintiffs counsel a

report in writing under oath setting forth in detail the manner in which Defendants have complied with any order granting any of the relief requested above, within 30 days after entry of such an order; 7. fees; and 8. This Court grant Plaintiff such other and further relief as it may deem just and Plaintiff recover from Defendant its costs of this action and reasonable attorneys

proper under the circumstances.

SLC70919103

18

Case: 4:13-cv-02391-SNLJ Doc. #: 1 Filed: 11/25/13 Page: 19 of 19 PageID #: 19

Respectfully submitted, Dated: November 25, 2013 __/s/ Michael R. Annis _______ Michael R. Annis (MO #47374) Andrew R. Gilfoil (MO #61655) Alan S. Nemes (MO #32498) HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP 190 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 600 St. Louis, Missouri 63105 Telephone: (314) 480-1500 Fax: (314) 480-1505 mike.annis@huschblackwell.com andy.gilfoil@huschblackwell.com alan.nemes@huschblackwell.com Attorneys for Plaintiff The Precinct, Inc.

SLC70919103

19