Case 2:10-cv RAJ Document 1 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 8

Similar documents
Case 2:17-cv EJF Document 2 Filed 10/02/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 2:12-cv JCM-VCF Document 1 Filed 11/13/12 Page 1 of 10

Case3:15-cv DMR Document1 Filed09/16/15 Page1 of 11

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/22/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. No. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:1

Case 9:18-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2018 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 3:15-cv AA Document 1 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 17

Case 0:10-cv MJD-FLN Document 1 Filed 04/06/10 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Court File No.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN JOSEPH BENGIS, an individual,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT AND TRADEMARK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION : : : : : : : : : :

Case 8:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv JCH-JHR Document 17 Filed 03/31/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. COMPLAINT and Jury Demand

Case 5:14-cv Document 1 Filed 11/06/14 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1

Case 2:11-cv CW Document 2 Filed 03/11/11 Page 1 of 9

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 14

USDC IN/ND case 1:18-cv document 1 filed 04/09/18 page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION

Case 2:13-cv RJS Document 2 Filed 03/06/13 Page 1 of 16

GIBSON LOWRY BURRIS LLP

USDC IN/ND case 2:18-cv JVB-APR document 1 filed 05/16/18 page 1 of 10

Case: 2:17-cv MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/23/17 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 1

Case: 4:16-cv DDN Doc. #: 1 Filed: 07/15/16 Page: 1 of 9 PageID #: 1

Case 3:17-cv JCH Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. Case No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, RESTITUTION AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Case 2:12-cv TC Document 2 Filed 12/10/12 Page 1 of 16

Case 1:13-cv CMA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2013 Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION Civil Action No.: 3:17-CV-398.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v.

Case: 4:13-cv Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/01/13 Page: 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

Case 9:13-cv KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/19/2013 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case No.

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 10/02/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1

Case 1:18-cv BLW Document 1 Filed 01/17/18 Page 1 of 10

Case 1:18-cv RGS Document 1 Filed 04/30/18 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

Attorneys for Plaintiffs LARRY KING ENTERPRISES, INC. and ORA MEDIA LLC

Case 1:16-cv GAO Document 1 Filed 07/29/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND PARTIES

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1

Case 2:07-cv CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 07/30/2007 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 2:16-cv RJS Document 2 Filed 09/29/16 Page 1 of 15

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case 1:18-cv WJM-KLM Document 1 Filed 11/07/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-381 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:1

Case 3:14-cv AA Document 1 Filed 06/02/14 Page 1 of 14 Page ID#: 1

3 James A. McDaniel (Bar No ) 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CEDAR RAPIDS DIVISION. Plaintiff, COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. v. Civil Action No. Defendant. JURY DEMANDED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER RELIEF INTRODUCTION

Case 1:11-cv CMA -BNB Document 1 Filed 04/07/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-165 ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION : : : : : : : : : :

Case 1:14-cv RWZ Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/24/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/24/2015 EXHIBIT C

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

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/09/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 12/15/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 COMPLAINT

Case 2:17-cv JFW-JC Document 1 Filed 10/13/17 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:1

Hells Angels Motorcycle Corporation v. Alexander McQueen Trading Limited et al Doc. 1 Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:11-cv CEH-DNF Document 1 Filed 07/12/11 Page 1 of 55 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/12/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:1

Case 1:14-cv JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO COMPLAINT

Case 1:15-cv EJF Document 2 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 5:14-cv HE Document 1 Filed 10/20/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case: 1:11-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 08/10/11 Page 1 of 19 PageID #:1

Case 2:18-cv JTM-MBN Document 1 Filed 06/04/18 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION. Civil Action No.

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 09/24/15 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demanded)

PlainSite. Legal Document. California Central District Court Case No. 2:16-cv WBS, Inc. v. Stephen Pearcy et al. Document 2.

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT

Case 2:08-cv JAM-DAD Document 220 Filed 07/25/12 Page 1 of 21

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 03/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Case 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5

Case: 1:11-cv DAP Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/19/11 1 of 9. PageID #: 1

Transcription:

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE MIRINA CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation, v. Plaintiff, MARINA BIOTECH, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT FOR WILLFUL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT, TRADE NAME INFRINGEMENT, FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN, AND UNFAIR DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff Mirina Corporation ( Mirina, for its Complaint herein, alleges as follows: NATURE OF ACTION. This is an action for willful, knowing and intentional federal trademark infringement, trade name infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition arising under the Lanham Act, U.S.C. (a et seq., Washington State common law and the Washington State Consumer Protection Act, RCW..0. (C-... ( -00

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of THE PARTIES. Plaintiff Mirina Corporation is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washington, with its principal place of business located at Eastlake Avenue East, Suite 0, Seattle, Washington.. Upon information and belief, Defendant Marina Biotech, is a corporation incorporated in the state of Delaware, with a mailing address of 0 Monte Villa Parkway, Bothell, Washington 0. JURISDICTION AND VENUE. The Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff s trademark infringement and federal unfair competition claims pursuant to U.S.C. and (a. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state law unfair competition and unfair business practices claims pursuant to U.S.C. (b, because those claims are joined with substantial and related claims under the Lanham Act.. Venue in this judicial district is proper under U.S.C. (b because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims at issue occurred in the State of Washington and in this district and a substantial part of the injury to the property and rights of Mirina that is the subject of these claims occurred in this judicial district. Upon information and belief, Defendant does business in this district and a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this district. PLAINTIFF AND ITS RIGHTS. Plaintiff Mirina Corporation is a Washington corporation with its principal place of business in Seattle, Washington. Mirina offers RNA based therapeutic research and drug development services. Plaintiff often promotes itself as, and generally is referred to by others as, Mirina (pronounced mə-rē-nə, which is phonetically indistinct from marina, alone. Mirina has been promoting and offering its services since at least August 0 to (C-... ( -00

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of pharmaceutical companies and others under the marks MIRINA and MIRINA CORPORATION and the trade name Mirina Corporation (collectively, the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name.. Plaintiff uses its MIRINA Marks and Trade Name when seeking and engaging business and investment partners, customers and employees. As a result, the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name are valuable assets of the company and serve in the marketplace as indicators of the source of Mirina s services.. Mirina has filed applications to register its marks with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (see Ex. A, Application No. 0 for MIRINA and Application No. 00 for MIRINA CORPORATION, both in International Class for Micro RNA targeted drug research and development; development of RNA based therapeutics and drugs; development of drugs and therapeutics for the treatment of a wide variety of diseases and other conditions, including cancer, fibrosis, liver disease, and renal diseases. DEFENDANT AND ITS INFRINGEMENT. On information and belief, Defendant Marina Biotech first began using the MARINA and MARINA BIOTECH trademarks and the Marina Biotech trade name (collectively, the MARINA Marks and Trade Name on July, to promote its RNA based therapeutic research and drug development services to the public, shortly after Marina s predecessor, MDRNA, Inc., acquired Cequent Pharmaceuticals.. With actual knowledge of Plaintiff s senior rights in the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name, and previously having been told that the name change would create a conflict with Mirina, Defendant adopted and began using the MARINA Marks and Trade Name in competition with Mirina to offer and promote research an drug development services, including development of RNA based therapeutics. Webpage printouts from Defendant s website (C-... ( -00

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of www.marinabio.com are attached showing its prominent use of MARINA as a trademark for promoting its biotechnology goods and services. See Ex. B.. The MARINA Marks and Trade Name are confusingly similar to the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name. Indeed, Plaintiff has received correspondence misidentifying Mirina as Marina. FIRST CLAIM LANHAM ACT (a FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN AND UNFAIR. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs through of this Complaint.. Defendant s use of the MARINA Marks and Trade Name for its goods and services constitutes false designation of origin, false or misleading description, false or misleading representation, and/or unfair competition. Such unauthorized use is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception of others as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Defendant with Mirina, and is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the services of Defendant with those of Mirina.. Such false designations, description, and/or representation constitutes unfair competition and is an infringement of Mirina s rights in its MIRINA and MIRINA CORPORATION marks, in violation of Section (a of the federal Lanham Act, U.S.C. (a.. Defendant knew or should have known of Mirina s rights, and Defendant s conduct and continuation of that conduct were knowing, willful, and deliberate, making this an exceptional case within the meaning of U.S.C... Mirina has been, and will continue to be, damaged by such false description, false representation, and false designation of origin in a manner and amount that cannot fully be measured or compensated in economic terms. Defendant s actions have damaged, and will (C-... ( -00

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of continue to damage, Mirina s market, reputation, and goodwill, and may discourage current and potential customers and others from dealing with Mirina. Such irreparable harm will continue unless Defendant s acts are restrained and/or enjoined during the pendency of this action and thereafter. trial.. Mirina has been damaged by Defendant s actions in an amount to be proven at SECOND CLAIM TRADE NAME INFRINGEMENT, U.S.C.. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the allegations contained in paragraphs through of this Complaint.. Defendant s use of the MARINA Marks and Trade Name when conducting business and marketing, offering to sell, and selling Defendant s goods and services is likely to cause confusion and mistake. Such use by Defendant deceives, and is likely to deceive, others into believing that Defendant s services are sponsored by, approved by, or affiliated with Mirina, which they are not.. Defendant has actual and constructive knowledge of Mirina s senior rights in its MIRINA Marks and Trade Name, but despite such knowledge, Defendant has continued its infringing behavior in disregard of Mirina s rights.. Defendant s acts violate the Lanham Act, U.S.C. (a.. Defendant knew or should have known of Mirina s rights, and Defendant s conduct and continuation of that conduct were knowing, willful, and deliberate, making this an exceptional case within the meaning of U.S.C... Mirina has been and continues to be damaged in a manner that cannot be fully measured or compensated in economic terms and for which there is no adequate remedy at law. The actions of Defendant have damaged and will continue to damage Mirina s market, (C-... ( -00

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of reputation, and goodwill. Such irreparable harm will continue unless Defendant s acts are restrained and/or enjoined during the pendency of this action and thereafter. trial.. Mirina has been damaged by Defendant s actions in an amount to be proven at THIRD CLAIM UNFAIR UNDER RCW..0. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs through of this Complaint.. Defendant s use of the MARINA Marks and Trade Name infringes Mirina s rights and constitutes an unfair method of competition in business and an unfair trade practice in business, as well as a fraudulent representation, which is damaging to the public interest in violation of Washington Consumer Protection Act, RCW..0.. Defendant s infringing use of the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name in connection with the promotion, marketing and sale of its services has been knowing, willful, and deliberate.. Mirina has been and will continue to be irreparably injured by reason of Defendant s unfair methods of competition and unfair trade practices in violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act. Such irreparable damage will continue unless the acts of Defendant are enjoined during the pendency of this action and thereafter. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as follows:. That Defendant, and its respective officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, be enjoined and restrained during the pendency of this action and permanently thereafter from all acts that infringe any of the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name or are confusingly similar to any of the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name, either directly, contributorily, or by inducement. (C-... ( -00

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of. That Defendant, and its respective officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, be enjoined and restrained during the pendency of this action and permanently thereafter from all acts of trademark infringement, trade name infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition, either directly, contributorily, or by inducement, including the use of the MARINA Marks and Trade Name or any term that is confusingly similar to the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name.. That Defendant be required to deliver up to the Court any and all products, service materials, advertisements, promotions and any other materials in their possession, custody or control that infringe any of the MIRINA Marks and Trade Name.. That Defendant be directed to file with this Court and serve on Plaintiff s counsel within thirty (0 days after the service of an injunction, a report in writing, under oath, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendant complied with Paragraphs through immediately above.. That Defendant be required to pay to Plaintiff such damages as Plaintiff has sustained, or will sustain, in consequence of Defendant s trademark infringement, trade name infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition, and to account for and pay to Plaintiff all gains, profits, and advantages derived by the Defendant that are attributable to such unlawful acts; and that such damages be increased as provided by U.S.C. and other provisions of law.. That the Court finds the Defendant s trademark infringement, trade name infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition willful and adjudge this to be an exceptional case and award Plaintiff its reasonable attorneys fees as provided by U.S.C. and other provisions of law. (C-... ( -00

Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of. That the Defendant be ordered to pay Plaintiff the costs of suit and prejudgment interest on all sums allowed by law. equitable.. That Plaintiff be awarded such other and further relief as the Court may deem DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff demands a trial by jury as to all issues so triable. DATED this th day of August,. Respectfully submitted, SEED IP Law Group PLLC /s/nathaniel E. Durrance Kevin S. Costanza, WSBA No., Nathaniel E. Durrance, WSBA No., 0 Fifth Avenue, Suite 00 Seattle, Washington -0 Telephone: ( -00 Attorneys for Plaintiff _.DOC (C-... ( -00