Sigma Phi Suit

Case 2:20-cv-12817-DPH-DRG ECF No. 1 filed 10/20/20 PageID.
1 Page 1 of 22
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
SIGMA PHI SOCIETY (INC.), a

New York non-profit corporation,
Case No.
Plaintiff, Hon.
v.
MICHIGAN SIGMA PHI, INC. d/b/a

ALPHA OF MICHIGAN SIGMA
PHI, a Michigan non-profit corporation,
and MICHIGAN SIGMA PHI
HOUSING CORPORATION, a
Michigan non-profit corporation,
Defendants.
Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

R.J. Cronkhite (P78374)
900 Wilshire Dr., Suite 300
Troy, Michigan 48084
(734) 558-5809
rj.cronkhite@dinsmore.com
Attorneys for Sigma Phi Society
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Sigma Phi Society (Inc.), through its counsel, Dinsmore & Shohl
LLP, file its Verified Complaint against Defendants Michigan Sigma Phi, Inc. and
Michigan Sigma Phi Housing Corporation, stating as follows :
03191979 v1
Case 2:20-cv-12817-DPH-DRG ECF No. 1 filed 10/20/20 PageID.2 Page 2 of 22
THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Sigma Phi Society (Inc.) (“National Sigma Phi”) is a non-
profit corporation incorporated in the State of New York.
2. Defendant Michigan Sigma Phi, Inc. d/b/a Alpha of Michigan Sigma
Phi (“Michigan Sigma Phi”) is a non-profit corporation incorporated in Michigan.
3. Defendant Michigan Sigma Phi Housing Corporation (“MSPHC”) is a
non-profit corporation incorporated in Michigan.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. The Court has federal question subject matter jurisdiction over this
action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1121, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1338, and 28
U.S.C. § 1367.
5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Michigan Sigma Phi and
MSPHC for at least the reason that both Defendants are Michigan non-profit
corporations doing business in Ann Arbor, Michigan, including at the address of 907
Lincoln Avenue, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48104, which is within this judicial district.
6. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because both
Defendants maintain a place of business within this judicial district, both Defendants
engage in business activity within this judicial district, and a substantial part of the
events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred within this judicial district.
03191979 v1 2
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
7. The Society of Sigma Phi began in 1827 and is the oldest extant Greek
fraternity in the United States.
8. Since its inception in 1827, the Society of Sigma Phi has used the marks
“Sigma Phi” and “ΣΦ”.
9. In 1920, the Society of Sigma Phi formally incorporated as Plaintiff
National Sigma Phi.
10. In 1955, National Sigma Phi federally registered the “Sigma Phi” and
“ΣΦ” marks, respectively attached as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 (collectively, “the
Trademarks”).
11. Since 1920, and continuing through the present day, National Sigma
Phi has consistently and continuously used the Trademarks in interstate commerce.
12. For instance, National Sigma Phi has used the Trademarks to solicit
dues collections, to communicate national publications, to solicit donations for
various causes, and to recruit members to Sigma Phi.
13. In 2010, Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC incorporated.
14. Michigan Sigma Phi is a Chapter of National Sigma Phi.
15. MPSHC owns title to the fraternity house that houses Michigan Sigma
Phi’s members.
03191979 v1 3
16. As set forth in National Sigma Phi’s Restated Constitution and Bylaws
(“Constitution”), National Sigma Phi’s purpose include, inter alia, “[t]o maintain
ownership and control of the name of the Society under any and all appropriate
intellectual property or similar laws.” Ex. 3, Article II, ¶ 5.
17. Pursuant to the Constitution, each Chapter must operate in compliance
with the Constitution’s letter and spirit. Ex. 3, Article III, § 1.
18. Pursuant to the Constitution, the National Sigma Phi, through its
General Convention, is the “exclusive judge” of the Constitution’s letter and spirit.
Id.
19. Accordingly, as a Chapter of National Sigma Phi, Michigan Sigma Phi
is subject to National Sigma Phi’s Constitution. Id.
20. In 2010, Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC began using the trademarks
of “Sigma Phi” and “ΣΦ”.
21. Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC may use the Trademarks only with
National Sigma Phi’s permission and if and only if they are compliant with the
Constitution.
22. In September of 2019, the National Sigma Phi initiated a number of
motions at the National Sigma Phi’s General Convention to interpret the
Constitution pertaining to certain membership requirements.
03191979 v1 4
23. Specifically, on September 21, 2019, and as reflected in the Minutes
attached as Exhibit 4, the General Convention convened in Burlington, Vermont to
vote on three (3) specific motions pertaining to Sigma Phi membership
requirements: (1) whether the Constitution, as written, permitted females to join
Sigma Phi; (2) whether the Constitution should be amended to permit females to join
Sigma Phi; and (3) whether National Sigma Phi should reaffirm that Sigma Phi is a
male-only fraternity.
24. As to whether the Constitution, as written, permitted females to join
Sigma Phi, the General Convention voted “No.” Exhibit 4.
25. As to whether the Constitution should be amended to permit females to
join Sigma Phi, the General Convention voted “No.” Id.
26. As to whether National Sigma Phi should reaffirm that Sigma Phi is a
male-only fraternity, the General Convention voted “Yes.” Id.
27. On September 30, 2019, the National Sigma Phi’s national publication,
The Flame, circulated an email to Sigma Phi members confirming the above three
votes at the September 2019 Burlington Convention. Exhibit 5.
28. The above determinations were consistent with National Sigma Phi’s
prior determinations, including determinations made by the National Sigma Phi’s
General Convention in 2017, where the Constitution was similarly interpreted in line
with centuries-old tradition and practice. Exhibit 6 at p. 1.
03191979 v1 5
29. Notwithstanding the General Convention’s determinations regarding
the Constitution and Sigma Phi member eligibility, Michigan Sigma Phi and
MSPHC thereafter permitted females to join the Michigan Sigma Phi Chapter and
permitted females to reside at MSPHC’s fraternity house.
30. Indeed, Michigan Sigma Phi, through its Board of Directors, provided
National Sigma Phi a list of Michigan Sigma Phi House Residents residing at the
MSPHC fraternity house confirming the above violation. Exhibit 7.
31. As a consequence of Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC violating the
Constitution and the General Convention’s determinations, Michigan Sigma Phi and
MSPHC lost permission to use the Trademarks.
32. As a consequence of Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC violating the
Constitution and the General Convention’s determinations, Michigan Sigma Phi and
MSPHC also lost insurance coverage through National Sigma Phi, including liability
insurance for its fraternity house, in October of 2019.
33. Michigan Sigma Phi and MPSHC nonetheless continued to operate as
Sigma Phi, including use of the Trademarks.
34. On December 3, 2019, National Sigma Phi, through counsel, issued a
cease and desist letter to Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC, including Michigan
Sigma Phi’s then-President, Anthony Cece. Exhibit 8.
03191979 v1 6
35. In the December 3, 2019 cease and desist letter, National Sigma Phi
directed Michigan Sigma Phi and MPSHC “to immediately cease and desist any and
all activities as an active chapter of Sigma Phi. No gatherings, parties, events, rush,
pledge events, or any other activities of any kind or nature are to occur using the
name Sigma Phi, the Greek letters of Sigma and Phi, or any other intellectual
property of Sigma Phi anywhere on or off the University of Michigan campus. . .”
Exhibit 9.
36. Upon information and belief, to date, Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC
continue to operate without liability insurance coverage, subjecting both its members
and National Sigma Phi to undue exposure.
37. Within days of receiving the December 3, 2019 cease and desist letter,
Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC, through then-President Cece, purported to
comply with the cease and desist letter, tendering on December 11, 2019, written
confirmation and proof of compliance in the form of photographs depicting coverage
of signage using the “Sigma Phi” trademark at MSPHC’s fraternity house.
Exhibit 9.
38. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Cece, along with multiple other Michigan Sigma
Phi board members, resigned from Michigan Sigma Phi’s board of directors; Kevin
Laliberte replaced Mr. Cece as President of Michigan Sigma Phi.
03191979 v1 7
39. After this mass exodus of Michigan Sigma Phi’s board members and
former-President Cece, National Sigma Phi discovered that Michigan Sigma Phi had
resumed operating as Sigma Phi and resumed use of the Trademarks—without
complying with the Constitution and the General Convention’s interpretation
thereof.
40. To the contrary, in direct violation of the Constitution, Michigan Sigma
Phi appointed a female member to Michigan Sigma Phi’s board—who continues to
serve as board member and director to present day. Exhibit 10 and Exhibit 11.
41. Between February and July of 2020, National Sigma Phi’s Chairman
met and communicated with Michigan Sigma Phi board members, including
President Laliberte, to express its objections to Michigan Sigma Phi’s continued
operations in violation of the Constitution and continued unauthorized use of the
Trademarks.
42. These meetings and communications did not result in either Michigan
Sigma Phi or MSPHC complying with the Constitution or ceasing and desisting from
using the Trademarks.
43. To the contrary, on September 24, 2020, Michigan Sigma Phi circulated
notice to its members that it intends to hold its Annual Meeting on October 24, 2020.
Exhibit 12.
03191979 v1 8
44. Michigan Sigma Phi’s agenda for its 2020 Annual Meeting includes a
proposed slate of candidates, which includes two female board members. Id.
45. The 2020 Annual Meeting notice makes use of National Sigma Phi’s
Trademarks. Id.
46. For instance, the 2020 Annual Meeting notice refers to itself as the
“Sigma Phi Society (aka Michigan Sigma Phi, Inc.).” Id.
47. Further, the 2020 Annual Meeting notice makes use of ΣΦ, as follows:
48. Further, Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC generally continue to
operate using the Sigma Phi and ΣΦ marks.
49. For instance, Michigan Sigma Phi uses the Trademarks on its Facebook
page, as follows:
03191979 v1 9
50. Further, Michigan Sigma Phi continues to fundraise and sell
merchandise using the Trademarks.
51. For instance, on June 23, 2020, Michigan Sigma Phi distributed a
written communication soliciting sales of t-shirts bearing one of the Trademarks.
Exhibit 13.
52. The t-shirts sold by Michigan Sigma Phi bore the following image:
Exhibit 13.
03191979 v1 10
53. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, National
Sigma Phi has suffered irreparable harm to the valuable Trademarks, including
infringement and dilution thereof, and to National Sigma Phi’s image, identity, and
goodwill.
COUNT I
Violation of the Lanham Act - False Designation Of Origin
and Trademark Dilution in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125
54. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding allegations as if fully restated
below.
55. Despite National Sigma Phi’s prior rights in the Trademarks,
Defendants have knowingly used in commerce National Sigma Phi’s marks, or
copies, reproductions, or colorable imitations thereof, in connection with the
products and services that Defendants advertises, promotes, and sells.
56. Defendants’ actions render this case exceptional within the meaning of
15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
57. Defendants’ misappropriation of National Sigma Phi’s Trademarks, or
copies, reproductions, or colorable imitations thereof, alleged above is likely to
confuse, mislead, or deceive customers, purchasers, and members of the general
public as to the origin, source, sponsorship, or affiliation of National Sigma Phi’s
products and services, and is likely to cause such people to believe in error that
Defendants’ products, services, and policies have been authorized, sponsored,
03191979 v1 11
approved, endorsed, or licensed by National Sigma Phi or that National Sigma Phi
is in some way affiliated with Defendants.
58. Defendants’ acts constitute false designations of the origin and/or
sponsorship of Defendants’ products, services, and policies in violation of Section
43(a) of the Lanham Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
59. Defendants’ use of the Trademarks has also diluted, and continues to
dilute, the Trademarks in violation of Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act, as amended,
15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
60. By reason of Defendants’ actions, National Sigma Phi has suffered
irreparable harm to its Trademarks.
61. Unless Defendants are restrained from their actions, National Sigma
Phi will continue to be irreparably harmed.
62. National Sigma Phi has no remedy at law that will compensate for the
continued and irreparable harm that will be caused if Defendants’ acts are allowed
to continue, and is thus entitled to both a preliminary and permanent injunction.
Sigma Phi is entitled to damages, treble damages, statutory damages, the equitable
remedy of an accounting for, and a disgorgement of all revenues wrongfully derived
by Defendants from its infringement of National Sigma Phi’s Trademarks pursuant
to 15 U.S.C. § 1117.
03191979 v1 12
COUNT II
Violation of the Lanham Act – Infringement of Registered Mark
(15 U.S.C. § 1114)
below.
65. The Trademarks have been in continuous use in commerce since at least
1920 and the Trademarks have acquired secondary meaning well before any use of
the Trademarks by Michigan Sigma Phi or MSPHC.
66. The public associates the Trademarks with National Sigma Phi and its
longstanding tradition, values, principles, and identity.
67. This association is a result of the distinctiveness acquired through
extensive advertising, sales, and use in commerce throughout Michigan and the
United States in connection with goods and services bearing or using the Trademarks
68. Despite National Sigma Phi’s prior rights in the Trademarks,
Defendants have used, and, with knowledge of National Sigma Phi’s rights,
continues to use in commerce, without National Sigma Phi’s authorization, the
Trademarks, or copies, reproductions, or colorable imitations thereof, in connection
with recruitment and in connection with the advertisement, promotion, fundraising,
recruiting, and sale of products.
69. Defendants’ use of a confusingly similar imitation of National Sigma
Phi’s Trademarks is likely to cause confusion, deception, and mistake by creating
03191979 v1 13
the false and misleading impression that Defendants’ goods are manufactured or
distributed, and goods and services are sold, by National Sigma Phi, or are associated
or connected with National Sigma Phi, or have the sponsorship, endorsement, or
approval of National Sigma Phi.
70. Defendants’ actions constitute willful infringement of National Sigma
Phi’s exclusive rights in the Trademarks in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114.
71. Defendants’ misappropriation of the Trademarks, or copies,
reproductions, or colorable imitations thereof, has been, and continues, with the
intent to cause, and is likely to cause, confusion, mistake, and to deceive consumers
concerning the source and/or sponsorship of National Sigma Phi’s image, policies,
identity, and products.
72. Accordingly, this is an exceptional case within the meaning of 15
U.S.C. § 1117(a).
Sigma Phi has suffered irreparable harm to the valuable Trademarks and to National
Sigma Phi’s image, identity, and goodwill.
74. Unless Defendants are immediately restrained from further
infringement of the Trademarks, National Sigma Phi will continue to be irreparably
harmed.
03191979 v1 14
75. National Sigma Phi has no adequate remedy at law that will compensate
for the continued and irreparable harm it will suffer if Defendants’ acts are allowed
to continue, and is thus entitled to both a preliminary and permanent injunction.
Sigma Phi is entitled to damages, treble damages, statutory damages, the equitable
remedy of an accounting for, and a disgorgement, of all revenues wrongfully derived
by Defendants from their infringement of the Trademarks pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §
1117.
COUNT III
Common Law Unfair Competition
77. Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding allegations as if fully restated
below.
78. Defendants’ marketing, promotion, offering for sale, fundraising, and
sale of goods under the Trademarks, or copies, reproductions, or colorable imitations
thereof, constitute false designations of origin and false descriptions or
representations that Defendants’ products and services originate from, or are offered,
sponsored, authorized, licensed by, or otherwise somehow connected with National
Sigma Phi, when in fact they are not.
79. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the public is likely to believe that
Defendants’ goods and services have originated from and/or have been approved by
National Sigma Phi.
03191979 v1 15
80. Defendants’ unauthorized use of the Trademarks, or copies,
reproductions, or colorable imitations thereof, falsely represents that Defendants’
goods and services emanate from or are authorized by National Sigma Phi and places
beyond National Sigma Phi’s control the quality of such products, and the message
that is associated with such products.
81. Defendants’ conduct is willful, intended to reap the benefit of the
image, identity, and goodwill associated with the National Sigma Phi’s Trademarks,
and has caused, and continues to cause, damage and injury to National Sigma Phi,
and constitutes common law unfair competition.
82. Defendants’ above conduct threatens injury and irreparable harm to
National Sigma Phi, including loss of its image, identity, and goodwill.
COUNT IV
Common Law Trademark Infringement
below.
84. National Sigma Phi has common law rights in the Trademarks based at
least upon continuous use of the Trademarks in the State of Michigan in connection
with fundraising, merchandise sales, recruiting, national communications, and other
activities, directly or through others.
85. Defendants’ unauthorized use of National Sigma Phi’s Trademarks, or
copies, reproductions, or colorable imitations thereof to promote, advertise, market,
03191979 v1 16
and/or sell its goods and/or services is likely to cause confusion, mistake, and
deception of the public as to the identity and origin of Defendants’ goods, or as to a
connection or affiliation with National Sigma Phi, or permission from National
Sigma Phi, that does not exist, causing irreparable harm to National Sigma Phi for
which there is no adequate remedy at law.
86. Defendants’ conduct thus constitutes common law infringement of
National Sigma Phi’s Trademarks
87. Despite National Sigma Phi’s prior rights in the Trademarks, and
despite Defendants’ knowledge of National Sigma Phi’s ownership and prior use of
the Trademarks, Defendants have continued to use the Trademarks, or copies,
reproductions, or colorable imitations thereof, without National Sigma Phi’s
authorization.
88. Defendants’ actions are deliberate and willful and have been done with
the intention of trading upon the valuable goodwill, identity, and image built up by
National Sigma Phi in the Trademarks.
89. National Sigma Phi has sustained injury, damage, and loss based on
Defendants’ actions.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
ACCORDINGLY, Plaintiff Sigma Phi Society (Inc.) respectfully requests
entry of judgment against Defendants, an in favor of Plaintiff, as follows:
03191979 v1 17
1. That a preliminary and permanent injunction be issued enjoining
Defendants, and any employees, agents, servants, officers, representatives, directors,
attorneys, successors, affiliates, assigns, and entities owned or controlled by
Defendants, and all those in active concert or participation with Defendants who
receives notice directly or otherwise of such injunction from:
a) using the Sigma Phi name, or any variation thereof;
b) using the Trademarks, or any other marks that are confusingly
similar to the Trademarks, for products or services, or making any other unlawful
use of Plaintiff’s Trademarks or any other marks owned by Plaintiff, and including
any use of the Trademarks in connection with any goods or services that are within
the zone of natural business expansion of the goods and services of Plaintiff;
c) using any false designation of origin or false description, or
performing any act which is likely to lead members of the trade or public to believe
that any product manufactured, imported, distributed, offered for sale, or sold by
Defendants or any service offered by Defendants, in any manner associated or
connected with Plaintiff, or is licensed, sponsored, approved, or authorized by
Plaintiff;
d) engaging in any other activity constituting unfair competition
with Plaintiff, or constituting infringement of Plaintiff’s Trademarks, including any
03191979 v1 18
use of the Trademarks in connection with any goods or services that are within the
zone of natural business expansion of the goods and services of Plaintiff;
e) taking any action, including the unauthorized use of Plaintiff’s
Trademarks that dilutes the unique association between the Trademarks and
Plaintiff, or that tarnishes Plaintiff’s reputation or image;
f) disposing of, destroying, altering, moving, removing,
concealing, tampering with, or in any manner secreting any business records
(including computer records) of any kind, including invoices, correspondence, books
of account, receipts or other documentation relating or referring in any manner to
any products or services offered in connection with the Trademarks, or any mark or
designation that is confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s Trademarks;
g) instructing, assisting, aiding or abetting any other person or
entity in engaging in or performing any of the activities referred to in subparagraphs
(a) through (f) above.
2. Awarding Plaintiff its actual damages, including but not limited to
disgorgement of Defendants’ revenues, and trebled pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a)
& (b), arising out of Defendants’ acts of willful infringement.
3. Awarding Plaintiff its actual damages, including but not limited to
disgorgement of Defendants’ revenues, trebled pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a),
arising out of Defendants’ acts of willful unfair competition.
03191979 v1 19
4. Awarding to Plaintiff interest, including pre-judgment interest, on the
foregoing sums.
5. Awarding Plaintiff its costs in this civil action, including reasonable
attorneys’ fees and expenses, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) and (b).
6. Awarding Plaintiff exemplary and punitive damages to deter any future
willful infringement as the Court finds appropriate.
7. Directing such other action as the Court may deem appropriate to
prevent the trade and public from deriving the erroneous impression that any goods
or services offered, advertised, or promoted by or on behalf of Defendants are
authorized by Plaintiff or related in any way to Plaintiff’s products or services.
8. Directing that Defendants file with the Court and serve upon Plaintiff’s
counsel within thirty (30) days after entry of judgment a report in writing under oath
setting forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendants have complied with
the above.
9. Award Plaintiff other further interim and final relief, including
monetary damages and costs, as this Court deems justice and equity require.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ R.J. Cronkhite

R.J. Cronkhite (P78374)
Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
900 Wilshire Dr., Suite 300
Troy, Michigan 48084
03191979 v1 20
(734) 558-5809
rj.cronkhite@dinsmore.com
Dated: October 20, 2020 Attorneys for Sigma Phi Society
03191979 v1 21

Sigma Phi Suit

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sigma Phi Suit

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Case 2:20-cv-12817-DPH-DRG ECF No. 1 filed 10/20/20 PageID.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SIGMA PHI SOCIETY (INC.), a

MICHIGAN SIGMA PHI, INC. d/b/a

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Michigan Sigma Phi Housing Corporation, stating as follows :

1. Plaintiff Sigma Phi Society (Inc.) (“National Sigma Phi”) is a non-

profit corporation incorporated in the State of New York.

2. Defendant Michigan Sigma Phi, Inc. d/b/a Alpha of Michigan Sigma

Phi (“Michigan Sigma Phi”) is a non-profit corporation incorporated in Michigan.

3. Defendant Michigan Sigma Phi Housing Corporation (“MSPHC”) is a

non-profit corporation incorporated in Michigan.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1121, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1338, and 28

6. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because both

fraternity in the United States.

“Sigma Phi” and “ΣΦ”.

9. In 1920, the Society of Sigma Phi formally incorporated as Plaintiff

National Sigma Phi.

“ΣΦ” marks, respectively attached as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 (collectively, “the

dues collections, to communicate national publications, to solicit donations for

various causes, and to recruit members to Sigma Phi.

13. In 2010, Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC incorporated.

14. Michigan Sigma Phi is a Chapter of National Sigma Phi.

intellectual property or similar laws.” Ex. 3, Article II, ¶ 5.

17. Pursuant to the Constitution, each Chapter must operate in compliance

with the Constitution’s letter and spirit. Ex. 3, Article III, § 1.

19. Accordingly, as a Chapter of National Sigma Phi, Michigan Sigma Phi

is subject to National Sigma Phi’s Constitution. Id.

of “Sigma Phi” and “ΣΦ”.

22. In September of 2019, the National Sigma Phi initiated a number of

motions at the National Sigma Phi’s General Convention to interpret the

Constitution pertaining to certain membership requirements.

23. Specifically, on September 21, 2019, and as reflected in the Minutes

attached as Exhibit 4, the General Convention convened in Burlington, Vermont to

vote on three (3) specific motions pertaining to Sigma Phi membership

requirements: (1) whether the Constitution, as written, permitted females to join

24. As to whether the Constitution, as written, permitted females to join

Sigma Phi, the General Convention voted “No.” Exhibit 4.

25. As to whether the Constitution should be amended to permit females to

join Sigma Phi, the General Convention voted “No.” Id.

male-only fraternity, the General Convention voted “Yes.” Id.

votes at the September 2019 Burlington Convention. Exhibit 5.

prior determinations, including determinations made by the National Sigma Phi’s

with centuries-old tradition and practice. Exhibit 6 at p. 1.

29. Notwithstanding the General Convention’s determinations regarding

permitted females to reside at MSPHC’s fraternity house.

MSPHC fraternity house confirming the above violation. Exhibit 7.

31. As a consequence of Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC violating the

MSPHC lost permission to use the Trademarks.

32. As a consequence of Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC violating the

insurance for its fraternity house, in October of 2019.

33. Michigan Sigma Phi and MPSHC nonetheless continued to operate as

Sigma Phi, including use of the Trademarks.

34. On December 3, 2019, National Sigma Phi, through counsel, issued a

Sigma Phi’s then-President, Anthony Cece. Exhibit 8.

property of Sigma Phi anywhere on or off the University of Michigan campus. . .”

and National Sigma Phi to undue exposure.

Michigan Sigma Phi and MSPHC, through then-President Cece, purported to

confirmation and proof of compliance in the form of photographs depicting coverage

of signage using the “Sigma Phi” trademark at MSPHC’s fraternity house.

Laliberte replaced Mr. Cece as President of Michigan Sigma Phi.

resumed operating as Sigma Phi and resumed use of the Trademarks—without

complying with the Constitution and the General Convention’s interpretation