Sie sind auf Seite 1von 15

3VS

^p

^m

i Steven J. Eyre, CB# 119714

2

3

4

5

6

7

3550 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1440

Los Angeles, California 90010

(213)385-6926

fax (213) 385-3313

stevenj eyre@gmai 1. com

Attorney for Plaintiff

OB

-<

o

nr

^

—!3C

*s» r-^c;

^* et>i»>~

^

tnr-y

^> > 2 v£J

C >—( —.-<

r- co ci

c^o—'

r- o

r^a*

r«o

CD

JC-

O

<-)

-H

ro

x-

cr»

8

9

10

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

321 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012

LACV14-8188?A(M\m^)

12

 

IGNACIO OROZCO,

No.

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-vs.-

Plaintiff,

JUAN MANUEL NAVARRO, JOSE

COMPLAINT FOR:

FEDERAL TRADEMARK

INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR

COMPETITION;

DIOSDADO, DOES 1-10,

2.

COMMERCIAL DISPARAGEMENT;

3.

STATE LAW AND STATUTORY

Defendants.

TRADE NAME INFRINGEMENT

AND DILUTION;

INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE BUSINESS

ADVANTAGE;

 

5.

ACCOUNTING;

6.

TEMPORARY, PRELIMINARY AND

Orozco vs. Navarro

PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Qio •

i

:- ""•

'••<

COIR;. ii

i

;t Court

:2

_^

COMPLAINT

111

B^3

Q

1

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

1. These claims arise under•tfo;

laws of the United States, particularly under

the federal Trademark Act, as amended, 15

U.S.C. § 1051 etseq., Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §

17200 and California statutory and commoiji

1331 and 1138(a). Jurisdiction is also proper

law. Jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ pursuant to the Court's supplemental

jurisdiction as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 136

2. This Court has specific pen onal jurisdiction over all of the defendants as

each has purposefully committed, within

th;

state, the acts from which these claims arise

and/or has committed tortious acts outside

would cause injury within the state.

California, knowing and intending that such acts

3. Venue is proper in the United

States District Court for the Central District

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

District, transact affairs in this District and

giving rise to the claims herein occurred wi

c) in that some defendants reside in this hat a substantial part of the events or omissions

hin this District.

THE

PARTIES

4. Plaintiff Ignacio Orozco is

resident and national of Mexico who performs his musical group VIENTO Y SOL.

extensively throughout the United States

with

5. Defendant Juan Manuel

Na /arro

resides in Los Angeles County, California,

Defendant Navarro is a dance promoter and

6. Defendant Jose Diosdado is

representative of one or more musical groups,

a resident of the state of Iowa.

21

7. The true names of the

defer dants

named herein as Does 1 through 10 are

22 presently unknown to plaintiff, who therefolre

23 Plaintiff will seek to amend this complaint

sues said defendants by such fictitious names,

10 allege the true names of said defendants when

24 he has ascertained such information. Plaintiff

is informed and believe that each defendant

25 named herein as Does 1 through 10 has

26 alleged in this Complaint and is liable to

par icipated

Plaintiff

in some or all of the acts or conduct

by reason thereof,

27

8. Plaintiff is informed and be

ieve that defendants DOES 1-5 are individual

28

musicians who perform with the musical g:

roup

of defendant Jose Diosdado.

Orozco vs. Navarro

COMPLAINT

4ft

o

1

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

2

3

4

9. Plaintiff Ignacio Orozco

foinded the musical group VIENTO Y SOL in the

early 1980's in Irapuato, Mexico. In that

year,

, plaintiffs group began to perform artistic

services under the name VIENTO Y SOL i

n

Mexico. Since the inception of the musical

5

6

7

8

9

group, plaintiff has continuously used the

with the live performances of his musical g

name

and mark VIENTO Y SOL in connection

;j-oup, in advertising for the performances ofthe

group, on television and radio, and in sound

recordings of the group.

10. At least as early as 1992

p|aintiffIgnacio Orozco brought his musical

group to the United States to perform. S

incfe that time, plaintiff Ignacio Orozco has

10

continuously used the name and mark

VIEKTO Y SOL in commerce in the United States in

11 connection with the live performances of hjs

12

performances of the group, on television

ard

musical group, in advertising for the

radio, and in sound recordings of the group,

13

11. Plaintiff is the owner of the

registration of the VIENTO Y SOL mark with

14 the United States Patent and Trademark

Office ("USPTO") in International Class 41 for

15 entertainment in the nature of live

performances by a musical band, Reg. No. 4,524,385,

16 with a registration date of May 6, 2014.

17

12. Defendant Jose Diosdado i

i$ a former member

of plaintiff s musical group

18

19

20

who left the group in or about 1999

his departure.

13. Plaintiff alleges on

Defendant Diosdado did not return to the group after

information and belief that defendant Jose Diosdado

21 recentlyformed his own musical group usih g the "Viento y Sol" moniker that plaintiff has

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

used for the past thirty (30) years.

14. Defendant Jose Diosdado

Has applied to register the mark"JOSE

DIOSDADO Y SU VIENTO Y SOL" in tl

services as plaintiff. As of August 4, 2014

e same international class and for the same

defendant's application was refused by the

USPTO.

15.

In spite of the refusal by

the

USPTO to register defendant Jose Diosdado's

mark, plaintiff is informed and believes

th£.t

defendant has used a printout of the

Orozco vs. Navarro

COMPLAINT

fs

Q

1

2

3

4

5

informational page relating to his application

, which shows that the application is still alive,

to mislead others into believing that he has

a registration for the mark in the United States

and is thus entitled to use the mark VIENTp

advertising for its services.

Y SOL in connection with his group and the

16. Defendant Juan Manuel

Navarro is a promoter and representative of

6

7

musical groups, particularly inthe Regionajl

and elsewhere.

Defendant Navarro has

Mexican music market of Southern California

e a career of promoting pirate groups, i.e. those

8 with dubious or no right to the use of name|s

that are confusingly similar or identical to the

9 names of well-known groups, and passing

10 musical groups, promoters and members o

hem off to the public, wreaking havoc amongst

the public.

11

17. Defendant Juan Manuel

Ni.varro

is the promoter and owner of the "Los 7

12 Grandes de America" ("The Seven Great

13 Auditorium in Wilmington, California on

Ones

of America") event at the Longshoreman

October 25, 2014, in which at least two of the

14 musical groups being advertised are "pirat<|:

15 of the rightful owners of the actual group,

groups" that are usurping the registered marks

With respect to the instant lawsuit, the "pirate

16

17

group" being advertised is "Diosdado y su

VIENTO Y SOL."

18. Plaintiff is informed and

b:l

ieve that the unscrupulous promoters and

18 owners to whom defendants Navarro,

Dios dado

and their cohorts sell the services of the

19 pirate group are well aware that defendant

20 "Viento y Sol," but have conspiredto

s pirate group is not plaintiffs musical group the public by advertising defendant's pirate

mislsad

21 group as "Viento y Sol," using defendants

false claims of having "registered" the name

22 "Vientoy Sol" as justificationfor their

misleading

g and deceptive practices.

23

24

19. Plaintiff is informed and b

defendant Navarro, have caused print and

25 public in a calculated effortto mislead the

;lieves that nightclub owners, including

ather forms of advertising to be placed before the

public into attending the performances of the

26

"no-name" pirate group by holding the pi

pirate

group out as plaintiffs group VIENTO Y

27 SOL. The only ones who profit from this

deception are defendants Navarro, Diosdado and

28 their cohorts as the sellers of the pirate grdup

Orozco vs. Navarro

-4-

COMPLAINT

^m

fy

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

20.

Meanwhile, plaintiff is iirreparat

bly harmedeach time defendants practice

their deceptions upon an unsuspecting

public

customers who believe the advertising and

pay to see plaintiffs musical group are dis^]

ppointed to find that the group performing is not

VIENTO Y SOL but instead defendant's

p rate

group. Suchcustomers are less likely to be

as trusting next time a performance by

plaihtiffs group is advertised. The damage to

plaintiffs reputation, earning ability and

bottom line is incalculable; the harm is irreparable,

21. Defendants canbe expecteji

order to benefit from the confusion they

activities.

are

to continue the above deceptive practices in

causing unless enjoined from such deceptive

FIRST CLA

M FOR RELIEF

(FEDERAL

TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND

UNFAIR

COMPETITION)

22. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates

in this cause of action all previous

paragraphs of this complaint.

23. This claim for relief arises

under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A) and is alleged

16

17

against all defendants.

24. Plaintiff is the senior user

ind owner of the trade name and service mark

18 VIENTO Y SOL and is owner of the regis

ration of the mark with the USPTO, as alleged

19 above. Continuously since the introductioh

of the group in the United States at least as

20 early as 1992, plaintiffhas usedthe mark'

/IENTO Y SOL in commerce in connection with

21 the services of his musical group as perfoifnm

g and recording artists. Plaintiffs mark is

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

inherently distinctive.

25. None of the defendants nafaed

utilize the name VIENTO Y SOL.

Defendant

ago, thus abandoning the group and any

claim

herein have any claim or colorable right to

Jose Diosdado left the group some 15 years to use of the group's name, and has never

sought to rejoin the group since thattime

26. Defendants are using plaintiff

s mark in a way that is likely to cause

confusion as to plaintiffs association wit!

, affiliation with, or sponsorship of the

Orozco vs. Navarro

COMPLAINT

0

9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

performance of defendants' musical group

Defendants' actions have led to instances of

actual confusion by promoters and consumers

27. Defendants' actions

constitute unfair competition in violation of section

43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125|(

a).

28. The actions of defendants,

;is alleged herein, have cause substantial

damage to plaintiffs reputation and mark.

29. The actions of defendants

a|nd each of them as herein alleged were and are

intended to cause confusion, have caused

unless enjoined.

cpnfusion, and will continue to cause confusion

30.

For eachact of unfair competition

ition, plaintiff is entitled to recover actual

damages as well as defendants' profits from

31. Plaintiff is entitled to treble

such infringement,

damages and prejudgment interest under 15

U.S.C. 11117.

14

15

32. Plaintiff is informed and bejlieves

that the acts of defendants complained

of herein were undertaken willfully and

wih

the intention of causing confusion, mistake

16 or deception.

17

18

19

20

33. Monetary relief alone is no

injury that defendants' illegal actions have

t adequate to address fully the irreparable

caused and will continue to cause plaintiff if

defendants' actions are not enjoined

Plairjtiff therefore is also entitled to preliminary and

permanent injunctive relief to stop defendants

' ongoing acts of unfair competition.

21

SECOND CLAIM

FOR RELIEF

22

23

24

25

(COMMERCIAL

DISPARAGEMENT)

34. Plaintiff realleges and incc

otporates in this cause of actionall previous

paragraphs of this complaint.

35. This claim for relief arises |under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B) and is alleged

26 against all defendants.

27

28

Orozco vs. Navarro

COMPLAINT

4^

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

36.

Defendants and their cohorts

;s, in connection with nightclub owners and

characteristics and qualities of the pirate group in a

others, have misrepresented the nature,

manner that has caused, and is likely to

continue to cause, damage to plaintiff.

37. In engaging in the actions

complained of above, defendants and each of

them willfully intended and continue to i

intend to trade on plaintiffs reputation,

38. In engaging in the actions

complained of above, defendants and each of

them have willfully intended to cause dilut

on of plaintiff s famous mark,

39. For each act of unfair

competition, plaintiff is entitled to recover actual

9 damages as well as defendants' profits frorh

10

40. Plaintiff is entitled to trebk

such infringement,

damages and prejudgment interest under 15

11 U.S.C. H 1117.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

41. Plaintiff is informed and

believes that the acts of defendants complained

of herein were undertaken willfully and intlen

tionally by defendants,

42. Monetary relief alone is nc

injury that defendants' illegal actions have

adequate to address fully the irreparable

caused and will continue to cause plaintiff if

not enjoined. Plaintiff therefore is also entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive

relief to stop defendants' ongoing unfair

competition.

THIRD CLAIM

FOR RELIEF

19

20

21

22

23

(STATE LAW COMMON LAW

AND STATUTORY TRADE NAME

INFRINGEMENT

AND DILUTION)

43. Plaintiff realleges and in

corporate in this cause of action all previous

paragraphs of this complaint.

44. This claim for relief arises

under the laws of the State of California and is

24

25

26

alleged against all defendants.

45. By their acts alleged hereiiji

, defendants have engaged in trade name

infringement and dilution, California Bus

& Prof. Code §§ 14330 et seq., and §§ 14402 et

27 seq.

28

Orozco vs. Navarro

COMPLAINT

|ft

o

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

46. Defendants have

intentionally deceived the public by misrepresenting that

their services are connected with plaintiff

musical group,

47. Plaintiff is informed and

bdlieves that the acts of defendants described

herein were undertaken willfully and with

deception.

ihe intention of causing confusion, mistake or

48. Monetary relief alone is

no|t adequate to address fully the irreparable

injury that defendants' illegal actions have

caused and will continue to cause plaintiff if

defendants' conduct is not enjoined,

Plaintiff therefore is also entitled to preliminary and

permanent injunctiverelief to stop

defendants' ongoing acts of unfair competition.

FOURTH

CLAIM FOR RELIEF

11 (INTERFERENCE WITH

PROSPECTIVE BUSINESS ADVANTAGE)

12

49. Plaintiff realleges and inc

orporates in this cause of actionall previous

13

14

paragraphs of this complaint.

50. This claim for relief arises

under the common law of the State of California

15

16

and is alleged against all defendants.

51. Defendants and each of thim

through their actions, have interfered withthe

17 prospective business advantage of plaintif

by interfering with the right of plaintiffto

18

19

20

exploit and benefit commercially from the

goodwill of the business of plaintiffs

trade name and mark VIENTO Y SOL and the

musical group,

52.

Plaintiff has been damage

led

by the tortious

interference by defendants and

21

each of them with plaintiffs economic

relations in an amount to be alleged by amendment

22 to this complaint.

23

53. The aforementioned acts

24

25

malicious.

Plaintiff therefore should be

alleged by amendment to this complaint

o|fdefendants were and are willful, oppressive and

awarded punitive damages in an amount to be

26

27

28

Orozco vs. Navarro

COMPLAINT

4^

o

1

2

3

4

5

FIFTH CLAIM FDR RELIEF

54.

(ACCOUNTING)

Plaintiffreallegesandin

co:porates in this cause of action all previous

paragraphs of this complaint.

55. This claim for relief arises

ander the common law of the State of California

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

and is alleged against all defendants.

56. Defendants are in possession

of information relating to monies paid to

defendants from their misleading and

deceptive

practices described herein, which

represents a misappropriation of monies

ledgers, etc. which will provide this inforrr

from

plaintiff. The books, accounts, records,

ation are in the possession of defendants and

eachofthem. The amount of damages

profits

and interest owing to plaintiff from

defendants cannot be ascertained without

En

accountingby defendants and each of them,

57. Defendants and each of

'them

have also benefited economically from the

14

usurpation of the trade name and service

nark

VIENTO Y SOL without accounting to

15 plaintiff for the income and profits realized

16 such activities.

by defendants and each of them as a result of

17

58. Plaintiff hereby demands,

md is entitled to, an accounting of all monies

18 received by defendants and each of them f

om their use of the mark and trade name

19

20

21

22

VIENTO Y SOL and any other confusing

iy

similar terms.

SEVENTH

(TEMPORARY, PRELIMINARY

CLAIM FOR RELIEF

AMD

PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF)

59. Plaintiff realleges and in

ccfrporates inthis cause ofaction all previous

23 paragraphs of this complaint.

24

60. The continuing wrongful

Acts ofdefendants herein have harmed and

25 continue to harm the interest of plaintiff i

lr l

the use of the name and mark VIENTO Y

26 SOL. Ifthis court does not issue a tempoijary

, preliminary and permanent injunction

27 against defendants and each of them prohjbitin

ingthe use of the name VIENTO Y SOL, and

28 other confusingly similar terms, in connecjtion

with the goods and services of defendants'

Orozco vs. Navarro

COMPLAINT

o

o

1

2

3

musical group, plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy

at law.

PLAYER

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for

relief;as follows:

1. For an order requiring defendants

to show cause, if they have any, why they

should not be enjoined as set forth below,

4uring the pendency of this action.

2. For a temporary restraining orqer.

, a preliminary injunction, and a permanent

injunction, all enjoining defendants and

employees and co-venturers, and all persor

of them and their agents, servants,

s in active concert or participation with them

who receive actual notice of the order by

pbrsonal service or otherwise, from engaging in

11 or performing any of the following acts:

12

13

(a) Using the name VIENTp

Y

colorable imitation of the name, in connectlion

SOL or any confusingly similar or with advertising in any form, or in

14

15

16

connection with the goods or services of

defendants or any of them;

(b) Using the name VIENTp

Y SOL or any confusingly similar or

colorable imitation of the name, in any

ma iner

for the purpose of enhancing the

17

18

commercial value of the goods or services

(c) Otherwise infringing or

of defendants;

diluting the distinctive quality of plaintiff s

19 service mark and trade name VIENTO Y

SOL;

20

(d) Causing a likelihood of

confusion, deception or mistake as to the

21 makeup, source, nature or quality of plaintiff

s or defendants' services;

22

(e) Contacting promoters,

Advertisers or other businesses for the purpose of

23 offering the services of defendants as

24 colorable imitation of the name.

VIENTO Y SOL or any confusingly similar or

25

26

27

28

3. For an order requiring defendants

to deliver up and destroy all promotional

literature, advertising, goods and other

injurious designations.

material bearing the infringing, diluting or

4. For actual damages in an

amoiint not less than $100,000.

Orozco vs. Navarro

•10-

COMPLAINT

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

5. For three times the amount of

plaintiffs actual damages suffered by reason of

defendants' infringement of plaintiffs mark

and trade name.

6. For three times the amount of

4efendants' profits derived from infringement

of plaintiff s mark and trade name.

7. For punitive damages in an am|ount to be proved at trial

8. For prejudgment interest.

9. For an accounting of all moniels

received by defendants from their activities in

connection with the use of the name VIENITO

YSOL.

10. For costs of suit.

11. For reasonable attorneys fees.

12. For suchotherreliefas the coijrt may deem appropriate

Dated:

October 22, 2014

Orozco vs. Navarro

/stevenievre/

Steven J. Eyre

Attorney for plaintiff

•11-

COMPLAINT

1

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

A

o

DEMAND FC )R JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff demands a trial of this actio n by a jury.

Dated:

October 24, 2014

Orozco vs. Navarro

/stevenjevre/

< >teven J. Eyre Attorney for plaintiff

-12-

*

COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL COVER! HEET

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS ( Check box ifyou are representing yourself fj )

IGNACIO RODRIGUEZ

DEFENDANTS

{Check box ifyou arerepresenting yourself Q

JUAItl MANUEL NAVARRO, JOSE DIOSDADO, DOES 1-10

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name,Address and Telephone Number) Ifyou are

representing yourself, provide the same information.

STEVENJ. EYRE, ATTORNEY AT LAW

3550 WILSHIREBLVDSTE 1440

LOS ANGELES, CA 90010

213.385.6926

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an Xin one box only.)

| 11.U.S. Government

Plaintiff

I 1 2. U.S. Government

Defendant

| 3. Federal Question (U.S.

Government Not a Party)

| 14. Diversity (Indicate Citizenship

of Parties in Item III)

IV. ORIGIN (Place an X in one box only.

H

1. Original

Proceeding

i—i 2. Removed from

State Court

3. Remanded from

Appellate Court

Cou ity of Residence of First Listed Defendant

(INujs. PLAINTIFFCASESONLY)

Attc rneys (Firm Name,Address and Telephone Number) Ifyou are

repr renting yourself, provide the same information.

LOS ANGELES

III. CITIZEIJSHIP OF

PRINCIPAL PARTIES-For Diversity Cases Only

(Place

:inX in one box for plaintiff and one for defendant)

Citizen of Thi

State

PTF

DEF

I

D •

D'DlS^™r'PlaCe

of Business in this State

»

J

I Dl

PTF

D4

Citizen of Ambther

State

Citizen or

Subject of a

Foreign Courjtry

n

2

3

n

2

3

Incorporated and Principal Place

of Business in Another State

F°rei9n Nation

5

6

4. Reinstate dor

Reopene i

5. Transferred from Another

District (Specify)

I

I

6. Multi-

District

Litigation

DEF

V. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND:

(x] Yes

No

(qheck "Yes" only ifdemanded in complaint.)

CLASS ACTION under F.R.Cv.P. 23:

[J Yes

[x] No

[>

MONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT:

$ UNSPECIFIED

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION (Citethe U.S. Civil Statute under whichyou are filing and write

a brief statement of cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity.)

15 U.S.C. sec. 1051, TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT

VII. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an Xin one box only).

OTHERSTATyTESi

CONTRACT

375 False Claims Act

Q

110Insurance

i—i

400 State

120 Marine

I—'

Reapportionment

 

410 Antitrust

130Miller Act

Q

430 Banks and Banking

140

Negotiable

Instrument

450

Commerce/ICC

150

Recovery of

Rates/Etc.

|

| Overpayments

Q

460 Deportation

Enforcement of

 

Judgment

470

Racketeer Influ

enced &Corrupt Org.

151 Medicare Act

fj

480 Consumer Credit

152

Recovery of

490 Cable/Sat TV

Defaulted Student

Loan (Excl. Vet.)

850

Securities/Com-

153

Recovery of

modities/Exchange

 

|

| Overpayment of

890 Other Statutory

Vet. Benefits

Actions

160

Stockholders'

891 Agricultural Acts

Suits

893

Environmental

r—I

190 Other

Matters

Contract

895

Freedom of Info.

Act

195 Contract

Product Liability

896 Arbitration

196Franchise

899 Admin. Procedures

| | Act/Review of Appeal of

Agency Decision

• 950 Constitutionality of

State Statutes

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:

CV-71 (06/14)

WEAL PROPERTY

[J 210Land

Condemnation

|

| 220 Foreclosure

230 Rent Lease &

Ejectment

Case Number:

REAL PROPERTY CONT.

240

Torts to Land

245

Tort Product

Liability

290

All Other Real

Property

310 Airplane

315

Airplane

Product Liability

320 Assault, Libel &

Slander

330

Fed. Employers'

Liability

340

Marine

345

Marine Product

Liability

350

Motor Vehicle

355 Motor Vehicle

D

Product Liability

360

Other Personal

Injury

362

Personal Injury-

Med Malpratice

365

Personal Injury-

Product Liability

367

Health Care/

Pharmaceutical

 

Personal Injury

Product Liability

368

Asbestos

Personal Injury

Product Liability

IMM GRATION

462 Naturalization

Application

465 0 tier

Immic ration Actions

'~"~'A

m

370

Oth er Fraud

w*

371 Tfuth

in Lending

D380

Ctheer Personal

Propejrty Damage

385 Pioperty Damage

Product Liability

.BANKRUPTCY

PRISONER PETITIONS

Habeas Corpus:

I | 463 Alien Detainee

i—i

!—I

510 Motions to Vacate

Sentence

• 530General

535DeathPenalty

•t;tilV.|.)'»iMb.;1r>-i!'!

• 540Mandamus/Other

I—I

550Civil Rights

555 Prison Condition

LJ

560 Civil Detainee

Conditionsof

Confinement

422 Appeal 28

FORFEITURE/PENALTY

USC 1558

r-i

423 V\

ithdrawal 28

_

I

625 Drug Related

I Seizure of Property 21

u USC1

57 USC 881

WiMCCIVILRIGHtS-j5j|%

• 440 Cjther Civil Rights

• 690Other

BIS^ff-gtABOR"

441V

442 El

443 H

jting

ployment

musing/

Acconmodations

445

Afnerica

n with

Disab

Em pl<'

ities-

yme

ent

Afnerican with

u

Disab

lities-Other

448 Education

r—I

710 Fair Labor Standards

Act

720 Labor/Mgmt.

L-' Relations

740Railway Labor Act

751

Family and Medical

Leave Act

790 Other Labor

Litigation

791 Employee Ret. Inc.

Security Act

LACVI4-8188

CIVIL COVER SHEET

-JMgamUOfP

• 830Patent

[x] 840Trademark

820Copyrights

•.*,»'•>,»'

• 863DIWC/DIWW (405 (g))

861 HIA(1395ff)

862Black Lung (923)

864SSID Title XVI

865RSI (405 (g»

fEDER^LTAXSlJI^

i—i 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or

L-J

r-i

Defendant)

871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC

L-l 7609

Page 1 of 3

4

5

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL COVER 5 HEET

VIII. VENUE: Your answers tothequestions below will determine thedivision oftheCo|urt

to which thiscase will be initially assigned. This initial assignment issubject

to change, inaccordance with the Court's General Orders, upon review bythe Court ofyour

iomplaint or Notice of Removal.

QUESTION A:

Was this case removed

from state court?

• Yes

\x\

No

If "no," skip to Question B. If "yes," check the

box to the right that applies, enter the

corresponding division in response to

Question E, below, and continue from there.

., 5T^tECASEWAS>JiNDINaJN

k.

'^tp'9^, <ffi ,'

• Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, or S< n Luis Obispo

• Orange

• Riverside or SanBernardino

/^VlT)*llD"IV|^kl^iD'lslF; i~4&

Western

Southern

Eastern

1

•g'l^II-^''

:„r*i-

>''

w~

'

•••it

QUESTION B:

Is the United States, or

one of its agencies or employees, a

PLAINTIFF in this action?

B.I. Do50%or more of the defendants who reside in

the district reside in Orange Co.?

check oneof theboxesto theright

""t

YES. Yourcase will initially be assigned to the Southern Division.

• Enter "Southern" in responseto Question E, below, and continue

from there.

• Yes

[x]

No

• NO. Continueto QuestionB.2.

If"no," skip to Question C. If"yes,"answer

Question B.I, at right.

W&'MAl&iMa&'&r*ii-i4 ,vm- i v

QUESTION C:

Is the United States, or

one of its agencies or employees, a

DEFENDANT in this action?

Yes

[x]

No

If"no," skip to Question D. If"yes,"answer

Question C.1, at right.

B.2. Do 50% or more of the defendants who r ;side in

the district reside in Riverside and/or San Bern srdino

Counties? (Consider thetwo counties togethejr.)

checkone of the boxes to the right

C.I. Do 50% or more of the plaintiffs who reside in the

district reside in Orange Co.?

check one ofthe boxes to the right

"•^

C.2.

Do 50% or more of the plaintiffs who resi

district reside in Riverside and/or San Bernardi

ie in the

10

Counties? (Consider the two counties togeth

er,

.)

checkone of the boxes to the right

YES. Yourcase will initially be assigned to the Eastern Division.

• Enter "Eastern" inresponseto Question E, below, and continue

from there.

NO. Your case will initially be assigned to the Western Division.

• Enter "Western" in responseto Question E, below, and continue

from there.

YES. Your case will initially be assigned to the Southern Division.

• Enter "Southern" in responseto Question E, below, and continue

from there.

• NO. Continueto QuestionC.2.

I I

fj

YES. Your case will initially be assigned to the Eastern Division.

Enter "Eastern" in response to Question E, below,and continue

from there.

NO. Your case will initially be assigned to the Western Division,

Enter "Western" in responseto Question E, below, and continue

from there.

' '.-t(

Wotfrainfffs an* tefwdints1?>",

'SX

i

;

-,-

»*£<-=•

•.

,••••

Sww"

' • .Aft*

#i

&fr

Indicate the location(s) in which 50% or more of plaintiffs who residein thisdistrict

reside. (Check up to two boxes,or leave blank ifnone 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 ifnone of these choices

apply

wrtmiw^^ii)m?w*-*r

i" i

i" ,•

D.1. Is there at least one answer in Column A?

Yes

[X] No

If"yes,"your case will initially be assigned to the

SOUTHERN DIVISION.

Enter "Southern" in response to Question E, below, and continue from there.

If "no," goto question D2 to the right.

""^

•*Vf

IISfc!&#

tOrange Coulfty j£ $Bbfadimpa!w;

^fe

octroy •

^t *,<

st'^r> ' $* llh

s

^MMA^kWU^-

D.2. Is there at least one answer in Column B?

Yes

[x] No

If"yes," your case will initially be assigned to the

EASTERN DIVISION.

Enter "Eastern" in response to Question E, below.

If"no," your case will be assigned to the WESTERN DIVISION.

Enter "Western" in response to Question E, below.

*

;jaj Division?

Enterthe initial division determined by Question A, B,C, or D above

iNrriAL DIVISIONJNCACD

WESTERN

'•iiiu

^"'"nn

Do 50% or more of plaintiffs or defendants in this district reside in Ventura, Santa Barbara, or San Luis Obispo counties?

CV-71 (06/14)

CIVIL COVER SHEET

Q

Yes

[x] No

Page 2 of3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL COVER?SHEET

IX(a).

IDENTICAL CASES: Has this action beenpreviously filed inthis court?

Ifyes, list case number(s):

IX(b). RELATED CASES: Is this case related (as defined below) to any cases previously filed in this court?

Ifyes, list case number(s):

Civil cases are related when they:

• A. Arise from the same or closely related transactions, happening,

or event;

• B.

Call for determination ofthe same or substantially related or sim

ilar questions of law and fact; or

C. For other reasons would entail substantial duplication of labor

ifheard by different judges.

fx]

NO

NO

[X]

YES

YES

Check all boxes that apply. 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):

/ftffir-

DATE:

October 22 2014

Notice to Counsel/Parties: Thesubmission ofthis Civil Cover Sheetisrequired b

neither replaces norsupplements the filing and service of pleadings orother

more detailed instructions,see separate instruction sheet (CV-071 A).

i Local Rule 3-1. This Form CV-71 and the information contained herein

papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules ofcourt. For

Key to Statisticalcodes relating to SocialSecurity Cases:

Nature of Suit Code

Abbreviation

861

HIA

862

BL

863

DIWC

863

DIWW

864

SSID

865

RSI

Substantive Statement of Caui

e of Action

Allclaims for health insurance benefits (Me ii

include claims by hospitals, skilled nursing

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

care) under Title 18, Part A, of the SocialSecurityAct,as amended. Also,

1acilities, etc., forcertification as providers of services underthe program.

All claims for "BlackLung" benefits under Ti

923)

Allclaims filed by insured workers for disab

all claims filed for child's insurance benefits

le 4, Part B, ofthe FederalCoalMineHealthand SafetyActof 1969.(30 U.S.C.

lity insurance benefitsunder Title 2 ofthe Social Security Act, as amended;plus

based on disability. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))

All claims filed for widows or widowers in

amended. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))

nsu-ance benefitsbased on disability under Title 2 ofthe Social Security Act, as

All claimsfor supplemental security income

amended.

paymentsbased upon disability filed under Title 16ofthe Social Security Act, as

All claims for retirement (old age) and survi\

(42 U.S.C. 405 (g))

ors benefits under Title2 of the SocialSecurityAct,as amended.

CV-71 (06/14)

CIVIL COVER SH EET

Page 3 of 3