Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 1 of 19.

PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

FUSE CHICKEN, LLC, an Ohio Limited Liability ) Case No.:

Company, )
) Judge:
Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
vs. ) DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
)
AMAZON.COM, INC. a Delaware corporation, ) 1) FEDERAL TRADEMARK
and DOES 1-10, ) INFRINGEMENT 15 U.S.C.
) 1114/Lanham Act 43(a);
) 2) FALSE DESIGNATION OF
) ORIGIN/UNFAIR COMPETITION
Defendant(s).
) OR MISLEADING ADVERTISING 15
) U.S.C. 1125(a);
) 3) COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 17
) U.S.C. 101 et seq.;
) 4) UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE ACTS
) AND PRACTICES O.R.C. 4165 et. seq.
) 5) TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH
) BUSINESS EXPECTANCY;
) 6) DECLARATORY RELIEF; AND
) 7) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.
)
) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
)
)
)

COMES NOW, Plaintiff Fuse Chicken, LLC (Plaintiff and/or Fuse Chicken) and hereby

alleges as follows:

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff is now, and was at the time of the filing of this Complaint and at all intervening

times, an Ohio limited liability company, with its principal place of business in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio.

2. Plaintiff alleges, upon information and belief, that Defendant Amazon.com, Inc.

(Amazon.com and/or Defendant) is a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of business

in Seattle, Washington.

1
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 2 of 19. PageID #: 2

3. Amazon.com conducts business in the jurisdiction of the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Ohio by offering and advertising goods for sale in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio

and other areas within this District, through the Internet, that infringe on the registered trademarks

of Plaintiff, the registered copyright images and videos owned by Plaintiff and common law

copyrighted images and videos owned by Plaintiff.

4. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise,

of Defendants herein named as DOES 1-10, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff. DOES 1-10 are

third-party sellers on Amazon.com and are selling counterfeit or knock-off Fuse Chicken products.

DOES may also be other entities controlled by Amazon.com. When the true names and capacities of

said Defendants have been ascertained, Plaintiff will amend this pleading accordingly.

5. Plaintiff alleges, upon information and belief, that DOES 1-10, inclusive sued herein

by fictitious names, are jointly, severally and concurrently liable and responsible with the Amazon.com

upon the causes of action hereinafter set forth.

6. Plaintiff alleges, upon information and belief, that at all times mentioned herein,

Amazon.com and DOES 1-10, inclusive, and each of them, were the agents, servants and employees

of every other Defendant and the acts of each Defendant, as alleged herein, were performed within

the course and scope of that agency, service or employment.

JURISDICTION / VENUE

7. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

1331 and 1338(a) and (b), in that the case arises out of claims for trademark infringement, false

designation of origin, unfair competition and dilution under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1051 et

seq.); and this Court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a) and 1338(a) and

(b).

2
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 3 of 19. PageID #: 3

8. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter as Plaintiff and all

Defendants are citizens of different States and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00.

9. This Court has personal jurisdiction over all Defendants since Defendants have

committed the tortious and illegal activities of trademark infringement and unfair competition in this

District, and/or Defendants have sufficient minimum contacts with this District such that the exercise

of jurisdiction over Defendants by this Court does not offend traditional notions of fair play and

substantial justice. Among other things, Defendants have purposefully advertised, offered to sell, have

sold and have purposely directed or sent to consumers within and to this District products that

infringe the trademarks of Plaintiff, and Defendants have purposefully availed themselves of the laws

and privileges of this jurisdiction by entering into contracts for the sale of goods with parties residing

in the District, including Plaintiff. Additionally, Defendants have purposefully offered to sell and

actually sold counterfeit and/or knock-off products (described more fully below) knowing or having

reason to know that consumers throughout the United States, including within this District, would

purchase such counterfeit and/or knock-off products from Defendants, believing that they were

authentic goods manufactured and distributed by Plaintiff.

10. Additionally, this Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Defendants because, upon

information and belief, Defendants conduct business in Ohio and in this District, or have otherwise

availed themselves of the privileges and protections of the laws of the State of Ohio, such that this

Courts assertion of jurisdiction over Defendants does not offend traditional notions of fair play and

due process. Further, the supplemental claims set forth herein arise from the same case or controversy

and same operative facts as the action over which this Court has original jurisdiction.

11. Venue is proper, inter alia, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1391(b) because, upon

information and belief, a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred

in this District, and have caused damages to Plaintiff in this District. The infringing [Fuse] Chicken

3
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 4 of 19. PageID #: 4

products were advertised and purchased in Ohio and Defendants purposefully shipped infringing

products into Ohio. Defendants actions within this District directly interfere with and damage

Plaintiffs commercial efforts and endeavors and harm Plaintiffs goodwill within this District.

Additionally, Plaintiff conducts a substantial business within this District.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

12. Plaintiff is an award-winning designer and manufacturer of charging cables for

smartphones and tablets. Fuse Chicken is widely recognized and highly acclaimed for its creative and

innovative solutions, including being the Toughest Cable on Earth. Plaintiff is one of the leading

companies in its industry and has gained recognition and numerous awards for its innovative products

and designs.

13. Plaintiff continually strives to discover and develop advanced technologies, coupled

with trend-setting designs to meet the voracious needs of the consumer electronics industry.

14. Plaintiff has spent substantial time, money, and effort in developing consumer

recognition and awareness of its marks. Through the extensive use of the Plaintiffs trademarks,

Plaintiff has built up and developed significant good will in its entire product line. Plaintiff is the

exclusive owner of federally registered and Common Law trademarks, (hereinafter Plaintiffs

Marks), including:

a. [FUSE] CHICKEN, registration number 4,395,772, registered on September 3, 2013;

b. BOBINE, registration number 4,810,459, registered on September 8, 2015;

c. UNE BOBINE, registration number 4,508,324, registered on April 1, 2014;

d. BOBINE AUTO, registration number 4,810,460, registered on September 8, 2015.

e. TOUGHEST CABLE ON EARTH, registration number 5,199,196, registered May 9,

2017.

4
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 5 of 19. PageID #: 5

15. Plaintiff has registered its [Fuse] Chicken Mark in the European Union as

registration number 013894241, registered on August 3, 2015.

16. Plaintiff has registered its [Fuse] Chicken Mark in the Peoples Republic of China as

registration number 19338823, registered on April 21, 2017 and currently has other trademarks

pending before the China Patent & Trademark Office covering its marks.

17. Plaintiff currently has several trademarks pending before the Intellectual Property

Office of the Philippines in the Republic of the Philippines.

18. Plaintiff currently has two trademarks pending before the Korean Intellectual Property

Office in the Republic of Korea.

19. Plaintiff registered a book entitled [FUSE]CHICKEN CELEBRATING 5 YEARS:

2012-2017, which is the subject of a valid Certificate of Registration, Registration Number TX 8-278-

584, issued by the Register of Copyrights on December 2, 2016. That registered copyright includes

most of Plaintiffs advertising and product images. Those images are currently used by Plaintiff,

Amazon, and third-party sellers of Fuse Chicken product on Amazon.com. Plaintiff also has several

copyright applications pending before the United States Copyright Office for its product packaging.

20. Plaintiff has several patent applications pending in the United States Patent and

Trademark Office for its innovative designs, in a further effort to protect the integrity of its Fuse

Chicken brand.

21. Plaintiff was issued an Industrial Design Patent, patent number ZL201630527841.8

entitled FLEXIBLE DOCKING CABLE FOR MOBILE DEVICE, on October 26, 2016 by the

State Intellectual Property Office of the Peoples Republic of China.

22. Fuse Chicken launched in May 2012 as a very successful Kickstarter campaign for one

product. Since then, Fuse Chicken has launched several products and has a comprehensive portfolio

of expertly designed and engineered products.

5
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 6 of 19. PageID #: 6

23. Fuse Chicken began selling on Amazon.com in 2013. Currently, Fuse Chicken sells

its own products on Amazon.com in three (3) ways:

a. Defendant Amazon.com purchases Fuse Chicken products directly from Fuse

Chicken and sells the products as ships from and sold by Amazon through Amazon

Vendor Express.

b. Fuse Chicken uses the Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) whereby Fuse Chicken ships

its products to Amazons fulfillment centers and Amazon picks, packs, ships and

provides customer service for the products.

c. Fuse Chicken sells its products on Amazon.com and ships the orders from Fuse

Chickens distributions center.

24. Upon information and belief, pursuant to Amazon.coms Limited License Agreement,

any Amazon.com seller that uploads materials, including product images, videos and text to be used

to sell products grants to Amazon.com and its affiliated companies a worldwide, royalty-free license

that continues in perpetuity including copyrights and trademarks associated with the materials.

Plaintiff uploaded such materials on Amazon.com.

25. Upon information and belief, for every product sold on Amazon.com, Amazon issues

an Amazon Standard Identification Number (ASIN) which may be linked to a products Universal

Product Code (UPC) or International Standard Book Number (ISBN). ASINs are unique blocks

of 10 letters and/or numbers that identify specific items.

26. Upon information and belief, Amazon.com has more than twenty (20) categories that

are open for selling on Amazon; products in these categories can be listed for sale without specific

permission from Amazon or the product manufacturer.

6
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 7 of 19. PageID #: 7

27. Fuse Chicken products are sold in the Electronics (Accessories) category. That

category is generally open to all sellers; while specific products may require pre-approval. Fuse

Chicken products do not require pre-approval.

28. For each Fuse Chicken product sold on Amazon.com, Fuse Chicken created new

product detail pages and offerings using the Amazon.com Add a Product tool or through Amazon

Vendor Express.

29. All Fuse Chicken products have UPCs. Upon information and belief, when Fuse

Chicken added products on Amazon.com, Amazon.com used Fuse Chickens UPCs to assign ASINs.

30. Upon information and belief, once Fuse Chicken ASINs were assigned by

Amazon.com, any seller purporting to sell Fuse Chicken products, authentic or not, can click Sell

Yours Here and be listed as a Fuse Chicken seller under the product page created by Fuse Chicken

which is populated with Plaintiffs Marks and registered copyrighted materials. Upon information and

belief, Amazon makes no effort to determine whether the products sold by such third-party sellers are

authentic.

31. Upon information and belief, when Defendant receives inventory for sale and

distribution, whether it is shipped to Amazon.com by the manufacturer, or whether Defendant

purchases product through Amazon Vendor Express, or whether third party sellers send inventory

for Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA), all the inventory is co-mingled in Defendants distribution centers.

All such inventory is pooled together by ASIN, regardless of whether the inventory comes from the

manufacturers or other sellers. When a consumer places an order, Amazon.com picks the ordered

product from the Amazon distribution center nearest to the consumer.

32. Upon information and belief, Defendants practice of co-mingling inventory,

regardless of source, results in consumers being shipped product that was supplied by an entity other

than the seller from which the consumer purchased the product. As a result, a consumer may order

7
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 8 of 19. PageID #: 8

product FBA or directly from the manufacturer and Defendant may fulfill that order with counterfeit

or knock-off product from third party sellers. This inventory and distribution process results in

damage to the brand and consumer dissatisfaction.

33. Upon information and belief, Defendant has co-mingled genuine Fuse Chicken

product with counterfeit and/or knock-off products resulting in damage to the Fuse Chicken brand,

consumer dissatisfaction and negative consumer reviews on Amazon.com.

34. Beginning in November 2016, Fuse Chicken discovered several counterfeit and knock-

off products being sold as genuine Fuse Chicken product under its ASINs. Fuse Chicken immediately

contacted Jeremiah Price, its assigned Amazon Business Development Manager, to alert Amazon.com

of the counterfeits and knock-offs being sold under Fuse Chickens ASINs. Mr. Price directed Fuse

Chicken to file a complaint at [email protected]. Fuse Chicken did so. Fuse Chickens complaints

were never resolved.

35. After repeated emails to Mr. Price regarding counterfeits and knock-offs, Mr. Price

stated that he was unable to assist or explain: (a) why Fuse Chickens complaints remained unanswered;

or (b) why Amazon.com continued to sell, or allow to be sold, counterfeit and knock-off Fuse Chicken

product despite actual knowledge of the unlawful activity.

36. Upon information and belief, there are only two (2) avenues for Fuse Chicken to

determine whether product sold by such third-party sellers is genuine Fuse Chicken product: (a)

Plaintiff must place an order for the suspect product and inspect it when arrives; or (b) Plaintiff must

monitor Amazon.coms Customer Reviews for hints of counterfeit or knock-off products.

37. Because Amazon co-mingles product from all purported Fuse Chicken sellers, it is

impossible, without assistance from Amazon, to determine which seller actually sent counterfeit or

knock-off product to the Amazon distribution centers. Upon information and belief, Amazon.com

8
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 9 of 19. PageID #: 9

has the internal capacity to determine which sellers supplied which product to its distribution centers,

even if the product is co-mingled.

38. On December 17, 2016, an Amazon.com customer who had purchased a purported

Fuse Chicken Bobine Auto iPhone Lightning Car Dock (MFI Certified) (ASIN B00V53FCOU)

posted a review of the product in Amazon.coms Customer Reviews. The reviewer gave the product

a one star review and stated that the product had broken in a week and was of [r]eally bad quality.

The reviewer also posted photos of the product. A true and accurate copy of the review and photos

is included in Plaintiffs Cease and Desist Letter, attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

39. Based upon the photos, Fuse Chicken determined that the product was counterfeit.

In response, Fuse Chicken replied to the review stating that the product was counterfeit, asked the

reviewer to contact Amazon directly to report the counterfeit product, and offered the reviewer a free

replacement of genuine Fuse Chicken product.

40. On December 24, 2016, Fuse Chicken sent a copy of the review to Defendants

employee, Mr. Price, told him that the product was counterfeit, and asked him to remove the one-star

review. Mr. Price, on behalf of Amazon.com, suggested that Fuse Chicken contact Amazon Vender

Express and ask for the removal of the review of counterfeit Fuse Chicken product. Ultimately,

Amazon.com took no action and the December 17, 2016 negative review is still posted on

Amazon.com and associated with genuine Fuse Chicken product, resulting in damage to Fuse Chicken

and its brand.

41. On May 8, 2017, Fuse Chicken placed order number 114-3710947-9469824 for a Fuse

Chicken product (ASIN B00HYY8CFK) sold by Amazon Warehouse Deals. Upon information and

belief, Amazon Warehouse Deals is a part of Amazon.com that specializes in selling products that

have been returned, warehouse-damaged, used or refurbished products that are in good condition,

but that do not meet Amazon.com standards for new product.

9
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 10 of 19. PageID #: 10

42. The product received by Fuse Chicken pursuant to order number 114-3710947-

9469824 was not genuine Fuse Chicken product. The product was a knock-off product labeled as a

Cable Data product. Neither the packaging or the Cable Data product itself referenced Fuse

Chicken. Additionally, the Cable Data product does not have a UPC on the packaging, unlike all Fuse

Chicken products. True and accurate photos of the knock-off product are included in Exhibit 1.

43. On or about September 13, 2015, Amazon.com began purchasing Fuse Chicken

products through Amazon Vendor Express. Upon information and belief, through Amazon Vendor

Express, Amazon.com purchases products directly from the manufacturer and becomes a full-time,

official, distributor of the products. Upon information and belief, products purchased by

Amazon.com via Amazon Vendor Express are sold through the manufacturers product page and are

labeled as Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

44. In the fall of 2016, Defendant stopped purchasing certain Fuse Chicken products

through Amazon Vendor Express, yet Fuse Chicken products continued to be shipped from and

sold by Amazon.com.

45. Concerned that Amazon.com was selling counterfeit items, Fuse Chicken notified

Amazon.com through Mr. Price that Fuse Chicken believed that Amazons own stock may be

counterfeit. On November 29, 2016, Mr. Price responded by stating that Amazon.com had

purchased purported Fuse Chicken product from a third-party source because the price was much

lower than what Fuse Chicken was offering to Amazon.com. Mr. Price later stated that Amazon

should not be ordering product from anyone else directly since [Fuse Chicken is] the direct

manufacturer.

46. On December 19 and December 24, 2016, Fuse Chicken again communicated with

Mr. Price regarding counterfeit and knock-off listings on Amazon.com and provided Amazon.com

with more occurrences of counterfeit products, counterfeit sellers, and negative Customer Reviews

10
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 11 of 19. PageID #: 11

resulting from counterfeit product. Fuse Chicken requested that all Fuse Chicken ASINs be closed

to any seller other than Fuse Chicken until the authenticity of the products could be verified. Again,

Mr. Price directed Fuse Chicken to Amazon Vender Express and told him to file another complaint.

Amazon.com took no action in response to Fuse Chickens complaint.

47. In May 2017, Fuse Chicken received a vendor return of purported Fuse Chicken

product from Amazon Vendor Express. The returned product was Cable Data product, not genuine

Fuse Chicken product. Upon information and belief, the Cable Data product was knock-off product

that Amazon.com directly purchased from a third-party and sold as genuine Fuse Chicken product

under Fuse Chickens ASIN. True and accurate photos of the knock-off vendor return are included

in Exhibit 1.

48. In addition to the multiple complaints regarding counterfeit and knock-off product

made by Fuse Chicken to Mr. Price, through Amazon Vendor Express, and through Amazons Report

Infringement portal, on May 17, 2017, Fuse Chickens counsel sent a 10-page cease and desist letter

to David Zapolsky, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Amazon.com. The letter outlined

Fuse Chickens concerns relating to counterfeit and knock-off product. The letter included several

verifiable examples of counterfeit and knock-off sales of Fuse Chicken product and requested specific

assistance from Amazon.com to address the issues. A true and accurate copy of the Cease and Desist

Letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

49. Amazon.com never responded to Plaintiffs letter, resulting in the filing of this action.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Trademark Infringement 15 U.S.C. 1114/Lanham Act 43(a))

50. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other allegations set forth

elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.

51. Defendants actions as described herein constitute direct and/or contributory

trademark infringement in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114(1)(a).

11
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 12 of 19. PageID #: 12

52. As a proximate result of Defendants trademark infringement, Plaintiff has been

damaged in an amount exceeding $75,000.00 to be proven at trial.

53. Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief that, as a proximate result of Defendants

trademark infringement, Defendants have unlawfully profited in an amount to be proven at trial.

54. At all relevant times, Defendants acted intentionally and/or willfully in using Plaintiffs

Marks in its advertising, knowing Plaintiffs Marks belong to Plaintiff, and that Defendants were not

authorized to use Plaintiffs Marks in advertising products other than those manufactured by Fuse

Chicken. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to recovery of treble damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(a).

55. Defendants knowing, intentional and/or willful actions make this an exceptional case,

entitling Plaintiff to an award of reasonable attorney fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(a).

56. Defendants actions also constitute the use by Defendants of one or more counterfeit

marks as defined in 15 U.S.C. 1116(d)(1)(B). Plaintiff therefore reserves the right to elect, at any

time before final judgment is entered in this case, an award of statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C.

1117(c)(1) and/or (2).

57. The acts of direct and/or contributory trademark infringement committed by

Defendants have caused, and will continue to cause, Plaintiff irreparable harm unless they are enjoined

by this Court.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(False Designation of Origin, False or Misleading Advertising, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))

58. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other allegations set forth

elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.

59. Defendants actions as described herein constitute direct and/or contributory

violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(1)(A), as such actions are likely to: (a) cause confusion; (b) cause

mistake; or (c) deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Defendants with Plaintiff

and/or to the origin, sponsorship, and/or approval of such goods by Plaintiff.

12
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 13 of 19. PageID #: 13

60. As a proximate result of Defendants trademark infringement and copyright

infringement, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount exceeding $75,000.00 to be proven at trial.

61. Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief that, as a proximate result of Defendants

trademark infringement, Defendants have unlawfully profited in an amount to be proven at trial.

62. Defendants acts of violating, directly and/or contributory, Section 1125 have caused,

and will continue to cause, Plaintiff irreparable harm unless they are enjoined by this Court.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Copyright Infringement, 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq.))

63. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other allegations set forth

elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.

64. At all relevant times, Plaintiff has been the holder of the pertinent exclusive rights

infringed by Defendants, as alleged hereunder, including by not limited to the copyrighted

[FUSE]CHICKEN CELEBRATING 5 YEARS: 2012-2017, which is the subject of a valid Certificate

of Registration, Registration Number TX 8-278-584, issued by the Register of Copyrights on

December 2, 2016.

65. The foregoing acts of infringement constitute a collective enterprise of shared,

overlapping facts and have been willful, intentional, and in disregard of and with interference to, the

rights of Plaintiff.

66. As a result of each of Defendants infringement of Plaintiffs exclusive rights under

copyright, Plaintiff is entitled to relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 505.

67. The conduct of each Defendant is causing and, unless enjoined and restrained by this

Court, will continue to cause, Plaintiff irreparable injury, for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy

at law. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502 and 503, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief prohibiting each

Defendant from further infringing Plaintiffs copyright and ordering that each Defendant destroy all

unauthorized copies of the images in [FUSE]CHICKEN CELEBRATING 5 YEARS: 2012-2017.

13
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 14 of 19. PageID #: 14

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices, R.C. 4165 et seq.)

68. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other allegations set forth

elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.

69. Defendants actions set forth herein constitute continued violations of Ohios

Deceptive Trade Practices Act, specifically, R.C. 4165.02(A)(1), (2), (3), (4), (7), (9), (10).

70. As a proximate result of Defendants deceptive trade practices, Plaintiff has been

damaged in an amount exceeding $75,000.00 to be proven at trial.

71. Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief that, as a proximate result of Defendants

deceptive trade practices, Defendants have unlawfully profited in an amount to be proven at trial.

72. The conduct of each Defendant is causing and, unless enjoined and restrained by this

Court, will continue to cause, Plaintiff irreparable injury for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy

at law. Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to R.C. 4165.03(A).

73. Defendants have willfully and knowingly engaged in deceptive trade practices in

violation of R.C. 4165.02, and therefore Plaintiff is entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys fees

pursuant to R.C. 4165.03(B).

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Tortious Interference with Business Expectancy)

74. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other allegations set forth

elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.

75. As the developer, manufacturer and seller of genuine Fuse Chicken products, Plaintiff

possess a valid business expectancy, to wit: the expectation to sell and profit from Fuse Chicken

products without the interference of third parties.

14
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 15 of 19. PageID #: 15

76. As the owner of Plaintiffs Marks and other intellectual property, Plaintiff possesses a

valid business expectancy to solely, with the exception of licensees, use such intellectual property for

legitimate business purposes.

77. Upon information and belief, Defendants knew or should have known of Plaintiffs

valid business expectancies regarding the Fuse Chicken product, Plaintiffs Marks, and Plaintiffs other

intellectual property.

78. By knowingly and willingly: (a) buying and selling knock-off and counterfeit products;

(b) allowing third-parties to sell knock-off and counterfeit products under Fuse Chickens ASINs; and

(c) unlawfully using and infringing Plaintiffs Marks and other intellectual property, Defendants

intentionally interfered with Plaintiffs valid business expectancies.

79. Defendants cannot provide any legitimate justification for their intentional

interference with Plaintiffs valid business expectancies.

80. As a proximate result of Defendants intentional interference with Plaintiffs valid

business expectancies, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount exceeding $75,000.00 to be proven at

trial.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Fuse Chicken, LLC, hereby respectfully requests the following relief

against Defendants, inclusive and each of them as follows:

1. For an award of Defendants profits and Plaintiffs damages in an amount to be proven at trial

for trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. 1114(a).

2. For an award of Defendants profits and Plaintiffs damages in an amount to be proven at trial

for false designation of origin and unfair competition under 15. U.S.C. 1125(c).

15
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 16 of 19. PageID #: 16

3. In the alternative to actual damages and Defendants profits for the infringement of Plaintiff's

trademarks pursuant to the Lanham Act, for statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(c),

which election Plaintiff will make prior to final judgment.

4. For an award of Defendants profits and Plaintiffs damages in an amount to be proven at trial

for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. 504 (b).

5. In the alternative to actual damages and Defendants profits for the infringement of Plaintiffs

copyrights, for statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 504(c), which election Plaintiff will

make prior to final judgment.

6. For an award of Plaintiffs actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial for deceptive

trade practices pursuant to R.C. 4165, et. seq.

7. Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants and their agents, employees, officers,

directors, owners, representatives, successor companies, affiliates, subsidiaries and related

companies, and all persons acting in concern or participation with it, and each of them, from:

a. The import, export, making, manufacture, reproduction, assembly, use, acquisition,

purchase, offer, sale, transfer, brokerage, consignment, distribution, storage, shipment,

licensing, development, display, delivery, marketing, advertising or promotion of the

infringing and diluting product identified in the Complaint and any other product

which infringes or dilutes any of Plaintiffs copyrights, intellectual property, Plaintiffs

Marks, trade name and/or trade dress including, but not limited to, any of Plaintiffs

Marks at issue in this action.

b. The unauthorized use, in any manner whatsoever, of any of Plaintiffs copyrights,

intellectual property, Plaintiffs Marks, trade name and/or trade dress including, but

not limited to, the Fuse Chicken Marks at issue in this action, any variants, colorable

16
Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 17 of 19. PageID #: 17

imitations, translations, and/or simulations thereof and/or any items that are

confusingly similar thereto, including specifically:

i. On or in conjunction with any product or service; and

ii. On or in conjunction with any advertising, promotional materials, labels,

hangtags, packaging or containers.

c. The use of any Plaintiffs copyrights, intellectual property, Plaintiffs Marks trademark,

trade name, or trade dress that falsely represents, or is likely to confuse, mislead, or

deceive purchasers, customers, or members of the public to believe that unauthorized

product imported, exported, manufactured, reproduced, distributed, assembles,

acquired, purchased, offered, sold, transferred, brokered, consigned, distributed,

stored, shipped, marketed, advertised and/or promoted by Defendants originate from

Fuse Chicken, or that said merchandise has been sponsored, approved, licensed by,

or associated with Fuse Chicken or is in some way, connected or affiliated with Fuse

Chicken.

d. Engaging in any conduct that falsely represents that, or is likely to confuse, mislead, or

deceive purchasers, customers, or members of the public to believe that Defendants

are connected with, or are in some way sponsored by or affiliated with Fuse Chicken,

purchases product from or otherwise have a business relationship with Fuse Chicken.

e. Affixing, applying, annexing, or using in connection with the manufacture,

distribution, advertising, sale, and/or offering for sale or other use of any goods, a

false description or representation, including words or symbols, tending to falsely

describe or represent such goods as being those of Fuse Chicken.

f. Hiding, disposing of, destroying, moving, relocating or transferring any and all

products, advertising, promotional materials, labels, hangtags, packaging or containers

17
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 18 of 19. PageID #: 18

bearing any of Plaintiffs Mark or which otherwise refer or relate to Fuse Chicken or

any of Plaintiffs Marks.

g. Disposing of, destroying, moving, relocating or transferring any documents or things,

including electronic records, pertaining to the purchase, procurement, development,

making, manufacture, use, display, advertisement, marketing, licensing, sale, offer for

sale, distribution, shipping, or delivery of any products or services bearing any of

Plaintiffs Marks or which otherwise refer or relate to Fuse Chicken or any of Plaintiffs

Marks.

8. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1116(a), directing Defendants to file with the Court and serve on Fuse

Chicken within thirty (30) days after issuance of an injunction, a report in writing and under

oath setting forth in detail the manner and form, in which Defendants have complied with the

injunction.

9. For an order from the Court requiring Defendants provide complete accountings and for

equitable relief, including that Defendants disgorge and return or pay their ill-gotten gains

obtained from the illegal transactions entered into and/or pay restitution, including the

amounts of monies that should have been paid if Defendants complied with their legal

obligations, or as equity requires.

10. For an order from the Court that an asset freeze or constructive trust be imposed over all

monies and profits in Defendants possession which rightfully belong to Plaintiff.

11. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1118 requiring that Defendants and all others acting under Defendants

authority at their cost, be required to deliver up to Fuse Chicken for destruction all products,

accessories, labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, advertisements, and other

material in their possession, custody or control bearing any of Plaintiffs Marks alone, or in

combination with any other word, words, or design.

18
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/21/17 19 of 19. PageID #: 19

12. For treble damages suffered by Plaintiff as a result of the willful and intentional infringements

engaged in by Defendants, under 15 U.S.C. l 1 l 7(b).

13. For an award of exemplary or punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the Court.

14. For an award of Plaintiffs reasonable attorneys fees.

15. For all costs of suit.

16. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.

Respectfully Submitted,

Dated: July 21, 2017 ICKES \ HOLT

____________________________________

Joel A. Holt [#0080047]

James Ickes [#0072892]
217 North Water Street, Suite E
Kent, Ohio 44240
P/F: (330) 673-9500
[email protected]
[email protected]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Fuse Chicken LLC

Pursuant to F.R.C.P 38(b), Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury on all issues so triable.

_____________________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff Fuse Chicken LLC

19
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 1 of 10. PageID #: 20

ThornCrest Law
1310 Rosecrans Str eet
Suite B
San Diego, California 92106

Kathleen M. Walker, E sq. Dir ect Dial: 619871 1 237

Fax: 6 19501 1621
Emai l: kat hleema thorn -crest .eom
www.t horn- crest .com

May 17, 2017

David Zapolsky, Esq.

Senior Vice President and General Counsel
1200 12th Avenue South
Suite 12
Seattle, Washington 98144-2734

Via FedEx Overnight Delivery

Re: Counterfeit/Knock-Off Fuse Chicken, LLCProduct on Amazon.com

Dear Mr. Zapolsky:

This law firm represents Fuse Chicken, LLC ("Fuse Chicken"), the maker of the Toughest
Cable on Earth. Genuine Fuse Chicken products are sold on Amazon through Fuse
Chicken's storefront. Fuse Chicken also sells its products directly to Amazon. Recently,
we have discovered that Amazon is selling counterfeit and knock-off Fuse Chicken
products through Amazon Warehouse Deals and Amazon Vendor Express, in violation of
Fuse Chicken's US trademarks and registered copyrights.

Obviously, because of the liability issues associated with counterfeit and knock-off
product, this problem should be as important to Amazon as it is to Fuse Chicken. I write
to you seeking your assistance in addressing these problems. Our goal is to work hand-
in-hand with Amazon to cleanse the marketplace of counterfeit and knock -off Fuse
Chicken products. Currently, there are approximately nine unauthorized sellers on
Amazon selling what is purported to be Fuse Chicken product. Amazon and Fuse
Chicken are the only authorized sellers on Amazon. The source of the product sold by
other sellers is unknown . Given Fuse Chicken's limited distribution and aggressive brand
protection efforts, we believe that the vast majority of unauthorized sellers are dealing
in counterfeit and/or knock-off goods. This is exemplified by the growing number of
reviews of Fuse Chicken product on Amazon describing the poor quality of counterfeit
products that are damaging the Amazon and Fuse Chicken brands.

1
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 2 of 10. PageID #: 21

Fuse Chicken's Brand Protection Program

At the heart of every brand protection program is intellectual property. Fuse Chicken
has four pending US patent applications, three issued EU patents, and one issued
Chinese patent. Fuse Chicken has one issued US Copyright, which includes the majority
of its images and has seventeen pending US copyright applications, which include all
Fuse Chicken packaging. Fuse Chicken has six issued US trademarks, six pending US
trademark applications, two pending Chinese trademark applications, and two pending
South Korean trademark applications . Fuse Chicken aggressively enforces its intellectual
property worldwide.

To maintain its brand integrity and flow of product into the marketplace, Fuse Chicken
limits its distribution and executes an authorized reseller agreement with all retailers
selling Fuse Chicken product. Currently, and at all times relevant to the events
described herein, Fuse Chicken has two US distributors. Fuse Chicken requires its
distributors to provide monthly sell-through reports of all retailers purchasing Fuse
Chicken product to ensure that its distributors are not selling product to unauthorized
sellers. Fuse Chicken's distributors provide potential retailers with Fuse Chicken's
authorized reseller agreement and the distributors are not permitted to sell to any
retailer that has not completed the agreement and been pre-approved by Fuse Chicken.
Fuse Chicken's authorized reseller agreement specifically prohibits retailers from selling
on Amazon. Upon receipt of the authorized reseller agreement, Fuse Chicken engages
in rigorous due diligence to investigate the retailer, verifies that the retailer has a brick
and mortar store, and that the retailer is a good fit for the Fuse Chicken brand.

Fuse Chicken uses Amazon's Report Infringement portal to report intellectual property
violations on Amazon. We estimate that we have submitted close to one thousand
intellectual property complaints via the portal within the past six months. For the most
part, the infringing listings have been removed. However, the larger issue relates to
third party sellers, including Amazon, that are selling counterfeit and knock-off product
under Fuse Chicken's ASINs. Because these sellers are linking to Fuse Chicken's images
and product descriptions, it is impossible for Fuse Chicken to verify whether the third-
party sellers are selling genuine Fuse Chicken product and whether counterfeit/knock-
off product is commingled with genuine Fuse Chicken product. To combat that
limitation, Fuse Chicken regularly purchases product from Amazon third party sellers to
verify authenticity.

Bobine Counterfeits/Knock-offs

Currently, there is a rash of counterfeit "Fuse Chicken Bobine Auto iPhone Lightning Car
Dock (MFi Certified)" (ASIN B00V53FCOU) on Amazon. The genuine product is pictured
below as Image 1; the counterfeit product is pictured below as Image 2.

2
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 3 of 10. PageID #: 22

8081 C AUTO

Image 11 Image 2

The most obvious difference between the product packaging is the hang tag . The
genuine product has a ribbon hang tag (Image 1). The counterfeit product has a braided
hang tag (Image 2). Although not visible in the images, there is also a difference
between the branding on the black base of the phone stand . Specifically , the
counterfeit product logo has a large gap between the K and Ethan the genuine Fuse
Chicken logo. As more fully discussed below, counterfeit product is currently listed and
sold under Fuse Chicken's ASIN B00V53FCOU. While Fuse Chicken does not
count enance any cou nte rfeit produ ct, it understands the difficulty that Amazon may
have in dist inguishing genuine Fuse Chicken product from counterfeit Fuse Chicken
produ ct because t he counterfeiter s have copied vi rtually every aspect of the product
and it s packaging.

In addition to the cou nt erfeit Bobin e produc t s, there also a knock-off Bobine product.
This produc t is being sold under Fuse Chicken ' s ASIN B00HYY8CFKentitled "Fuse Chicken
BOBINE Charge Cable/Stand (MFi Certified Lightning)." The knock-off product does not
purport to be Fuse Chicken product either through its packaging or product branding .
The knock-off product is labeled Cable Data and the branding on the black base of the
phone stand is "Creative Hand." Image 3 below is a photo of the Cable Data product
packaging.

1 Fuse Chicken recently changed the packaging for the Bobine Auto products because of counterfeiters .
Image 1 is Fuse Chicken's old packaging that the counterfeiters have unlawfully replicat ed.

3
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 4 of 10. PageID #: 23

(; ; .ata

+1
tl ll ~ , -~

- :.-:a, a..
I

- .. I
Image 3 Image 4

The packaging displayed in Image 3 infringes Fuse Chicken's US Copyright registration

numb er TX 8-278-584, entitled "[FUSE]chicken Celebrating 5 Years: 2012-2017," 2 as it
includes Fuse Chicken's images on the product packaging. Most recently, the makers of
the Cable Data product produced alternate packaging after receiving thousands of
copyright infringement complaints from Fuse Chicken. The new product packaging no
longer embeds Fuse Chicken images on the packaging. Both the old and new Cable Data
product is in the marketplace . Image 4 is a photo of Cable Data's new product
packaging. While the copyright infringement has been rectified through the new
packaging, this product is still being sold as genuine Fuse Chicken product under Fuse
Chicken ASIN B00HYY8CFK. The genui ne Fuse Chicken product packaging for this ASIN is
pictur ed below as Image 5.

80B1 E

Image 5

2 Fuse Chicken's registered copyright images (reg. no. TX 8-278-584) are accessible at

www.fusech icken. com/pages/ copyrightphotos .

4
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 5 of 10. PageID #: 24

Fuse Chicken cannot comprehend how Amazon is fulfilling orders of Fuse Chicken ASIN
B00HYY8CFKwith the Cable Data product as the Cable Data product and packaging does
not purp ort to be Fuse Chicken product and the packaging is completely different. Yet,
the Cable Data product is being sold as Fuse Chicken ASIN B00HYY8CFKby third party
sellers and Amazon FBA sellers.

As detail ed below, Fuse Chicken has repeat edly put Amazon on notice of the
counterf eit s and knock-offs that are being sold under its ASINs. Amazon has done
nothin g t o assist Fuse Chicken in ridding the marketplace of these unlawful products.

Amazon's Sales Of Counterfeit/Knock-Off Products

Fuse Chicken has discovered tha t Amazon is currently selling counter feit and knock -off
products under Fuse Chicken's ASINs. Fuse Chicken has verified this fact t hrough test
buys, consumer reviews, and Vendor returns . Below are three examples of counterfeit
and knock-off products being sold as Fuse Chicken prod uct .

1. Amazon Warehouse Deals

Jon Fawcett, th e founder of Fuse Chicken, placed order number 114-3710947-9469824

for what w as listed as Fuse Chicken BOBINE Charge Cable/Stand (MFi Certified
Lightnin g) (ASIN B00HYY8CFK)sold by Amazon Warehouse Deals. The product delivered
pursuant to Mr. Fawcett's order was Cable Data:

A simp le review of the Cable Data product indicates that it is not Fuse Chicken product
as ther e is no Fuse Chicken branding on the packaging or product. In short, Amazon is
palmin g off Cable Data product as Fuse Chicken product in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125.

2. Ships And Sold By Amazon-Vendor Express Counterfeit/Knock-Off Product

Amazon is selling knock-off Fuse Chicken product direct ly to consu mers via Vendor

5
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 6 of 10. PageID #: 25

Express. This month, Fuse Chicken received a vendor return from Amazon through
Vendor Express. The returned product was the Cable Data product. Pictured below as
Image 6 is a photo of the Vendor Express product returned to Fuse Chicken. 3

Image 6

There should be no counterfeit product or knock-offs in Amazon's Vendor program

unless Amazon is purchasing knock-off product or is commingling Vendor product with
third-party Amazon FBA product. Neither alternative is acceptable. Based on
correspondence with Jeremiah Price, an Amazon Business Development Manager, Fuse
Chicken learned that Amazon did purchase Fuse Chicken product from someone other
than Fuse Chicken.

On November 29, 2016, Mr. Price told Mr. Fawcett that he believed that Amazon was
directly purchasing Fuse Chicken product from a source other than Fuse Chicken. Mr.
Price explained that Amazon purchased from a third-party source because the "price to
us was much lower than what you were offering." In response, Mr. Fawcett informed
Mr. Price that he believed the product purchased by Amazon from the third-party
source was counterfeit or a knock-off . Mr. Fawcett believed that Amazon was selling
counterfeit/knock-off product through the Vendor Express based upon the awful
reviews of the product that were posted after Amazon stopped purchasing from Fuse
Chicken directly. Mr . Fawcett requested a sample of the third-party product and related
pricing information. Mr. Price responded saying that Amazon was no longer purchasing
from the third-party source, that he had no access to the data requested, and that
Amazon had sold through the product and no samples were available.

Mr. Fawcett became suspicion of Amazon's direct sales of its Bobine product line based
on the lack of orders that Amazon placed with Fuse Chicken. In October 2016, Amazon
placed an order for 306 units of the Bobine products. In November and December
2016, Amazon placed no orders for the Bobine products . Yet, during that time period,
there was an unusual spike in the number of negative product reviews for the Bobine
products. Fuse Chicken believes that the counterfeit issues began in November 2016

3 Fuse Chicken filed a dispute with Vendor Express {ID DSPT10342182367) regarding this return and
alerted Amazon that the returned product was not genuine Fuse Chicken product.

6
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 7 of 10. PageID #: 26

when Amazon began purchas ing product from a third-party source. Fuse Chicken has
done an analysis of its reviews on Amazon before and after November 1, 2016 when the
counterfeit product began to appear. As demonstrated in the graph below , Fuse
Chicken's 4 and 5 star reviews dropped from 49.02% of reviews to 22.73% of reviews.
Simultaneously, Fuse Chicken's one star reviews almost doubled from 29.41 % of reviews
to 50% of reviews.

Reviews
Average Stars Total Reviews S Star % 4 Star % 3 Star ;. 2 Star % 1 Star ,<,

Before Nov 1 201 6 3.13 102 36 35.29':o 14 13.730 9 8.82 % 13 12.75% 30 29.41 '0
After Nov 1 2016 2.2 1 66 10 15.15.,..
'o 5 7.58'0 7 10.61~. 11 16.67. 33 so.00.

4-5 Stars dropped more tha n half from 49.02 % down to 2 2 .73
1 Star almost doubled from 29.41 % up to 50\.

On December 19 and December 24, 2016, Mr . Fawcett communicated with

Mr. Price regarding the counterfeit listings on Amazon. On December 24, 2016, Mr.
Fawcett provided Mr. Price with instances of counterfeit products, counterfeit selle rs,
and negative reviews resulting from counterfeit product . Mr . Fawcett requested that
"all seller listings on our ASINs be closed except for Fuse Chicken" and warned that he
suspected "that Amazon's own stock may be counterfeit." Mr. Fawcett requested that
"Amazon stop selling its stock unti l we can verify it by photos from you r warehouse."
Mr. Price's response was to "submit a case with VE and let them know about the
fraudulent seller ." That same day, Mr. Fawcett did subm it a detailed email to Amazon
Vendor Express. A copy of that email is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. In response, Mr .
Fawcett received a canned email instructing him to do what he had already done - file a
report at [email protected] . After complaining to Mr . Price about the inaction,
Mr . Price admitted that he had " no access to third party listings, but I do show EZ4MOB
is an active third party seller whose price is way too low to be legit ." Mr. Fawcett
responded by stating that seller EZ4MOB was a copycat seller (i.e. the Cable Dat a
product) and not a counterfeit seller. Again, Mr . Fawcett warned that it appeared that
the "counterfeit come from Amazon ' s stock base ... This is why it is so urgent fo r us .. .
because it appears . . . that the counterfeit stock is actually Amazon's stock ."

Mr. Price did not respond . Accordingly, on January 30, 2017, Mr. Fawcett again
contacted Mr. Price requesting that Amazon "remove all sellers from our listings on
Amazon and require our approval of each seller [and] require Amazon to only purchase
as a vendor from Fuse Chicken directly." Mr. Price responded by referring all complaints
to "VE" and stated that "Amazon should not be ordering product from anyone else
directly since you are the direct manufacturer." Mr. Fawcett responded by specifically
asking Mr. Price to enroll Fuse Chicken in the brand-gating program . The following day,
Mr. Price responded that brand gating was only open to "major brand names in certain
categories that are selling directly to Amazon or for th ird party sellers trying to sell

7
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 8 of 10. PageID #: 27

specific products ... only because they spend millions of dollars on Amazon ... " The
only way that Fuse Chicken could protect its brand from Amazon and counterfeit/knock-
off sellers was to stop fulfilling Amazon's orders.

3. Third-Party Sellers Selling Under Fuse Chicken's ASINs

Beginning in November 2016, Fuse Chicken sent numerous emails to Mr. Price,
regarding issues with counterfeits , knock -offs and Fuse Chicken sales to Amazon. For
example, on November 21, 2016, Mr. Fawcett reported counterfeit products being sold
by a third-party seller that was wrongfully using "Fuse Chicken" as its store name (Case
1947591571). Mr. Price indicated that the case was under review and suggested that
Mr. Fawcett file another complaint at [email protected] . Mr. Fawcett did as
instructed and got no resolution. Mr. Price indicated that [email protected] is a
"higher department" and that he did not have any contacts in that department, so was
unable to assist or explain why the complaints had not been acted upon.

Again, December 24, 2016, Mr. Fawcett sent to Mr. Price a copy of a verified purchase
review of counterfeit "Fuse Chicken Bobine Auto iPhone Lightning Car Dock (MFi
Certified)" (ASIN B00V53FCOU). Based upon the product photo that the reviewer
uploaded, Mr. Fawcett was able to identify the product as counterfeit. Mr. Price was
unable to assist Fuse Chicken and again he recommended submitted a case to "VE" to
"have them start removing the negat ive fraud reviews." VE did not remove the negative
review and the review of counterfeit Fuse Chicken product is still on Amazon today:

Broke in a week.
By Amazon Customer on December 17, 201 6
Verified Pu rchJsc

I bought this produ ct and sent it to rny dad in Brazil t hrough a friend .
It got t here in perf ect condition s, my dad used it for a week and he w as really enjoy ing it , until the dock brok e.
I am really unsat isfied wit h t 1is product, it is very expensive and it broke in a week. Really bad quality.

We know that the Cable Data product, wrongfully listed under a Fuse Chicken ASIN, is
still being sold. On May 14, 2017, Fuse Chicken filed complaint through the Amazon
portal against third-party seller sffoto for listing Cable Data product under a Fuse
Chicken ASIN B01CNSQMNU.

Sales of Counterfeit/Knock-Off Fuse Chicken Product Under Non-Fuse Chicken ASINs

Fuse Chicken has filed multiple complaints regarding the Cable Data product through
the Amazon Infringement Report portable, stating that the product packaging contained

8
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 9 of 10. PageID #: 28

Fuse Chicken's registered copyrighted images and requesting that all Cable Data product
be remov ed from Amazon. Amazon resp onded by removing the specific listings
compla ined of, but made no assurances that all Cable Data product was eradicated from
Amazon.

Requested Assistance From Amazon

While Fuse Chicken would like to continue selling on Amazo n and t o Amazon directly , it
cannot do so given the cu rr ent landscape. Accordingly , Fuse Chicke n requests t he
following from Amazon:

1. Immediate brand-gati ng for all Fuse Chicken products;

2. Prohibition of the sale of any Fuse Chicken products from any selle r othe r
than Fuse Chicken (including Amazon, LLCand Amazon Warehouse Deals};
3. Allow Fuse Chicken to review all stock in all Amazon distribut ion cent ers for
all Fuse Chicken ASINs to confirm that the stoc k is genuine ;
4. Remove all one and two star reviews from "Fuse Chicken BOBINE Charge
Cable/Stand (MF i Cert ified Lightning)" {ASIN B00HYY8CFK)and "Fuse Chicken
Bobine Auto iPhone Lightning Car Dock {MFi Certified)" {ASIN B00V53FCOU}
products that are dated after November 1, 2016 unless and until it can be
confirmed that consumers received genuine Fuse Chicken products;
5. Return all Fuse Chicken FBA stock on all Fuse Chicken ASINs at no cost to
Fuse Chicken;
6. Segregate all Cable Data product from Amazon distribution centers and
provide Fuse Chicken with the contact information for all sellers and the
number of units sold by those sellers so that Fuse Chicken can prosecute
Cable Data sellers for copyright infringement; and
7. Return all Fuse Chicken FBA product sold by third party sellers to the
respective sellers and inform the third -party sellers that they are no longer
authorized to sell Fuse Chicken product on Amazon and provide Fuse Chicken
with the contact information for all such sellers and the number of units sold
by those sellers so that Fuse Chicken can communicate directly with the
sellers regarding potential intellectual property infringements.

As detailed herein, Fuse Chicken has repeatedly informed Amazon of the counterfeit
and knock-off problems plaguing t he Fuse Chicken brand on Amazon . Amazon has done
nothing to remedy these intellectual property infringements and has created subst antia l
financial and reputational losses t o Fuse Chicken. Fuse Chicken estim ates that since
November 2016 that is has lost between $50 ,000 and $100,000 in sales due to
counterfeits and knock-offs sold on Amazon. Given t he subst ant ial losses, Fuse Chicken
is willing to leave the Amazon marketplace complete ly and pu rsue its legal remedies
absent real cooperation from Amazon. Please respond t o t his corr espo ndence wit h five
business days.

This letter does not list all instances of grievance that Fuse Chicken has again st Am azon

9
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 07/21/17 10 of 10. PageID #: 29
and is sent without prejudice to any of Fuse Chicken's rights and remedies, which are
expressly reserved.

7~ v~;}c,_,1fu
Kathleen M. Walker

cc: Jon Fawcett

10
 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-2 Filed: 07/21/17 1 of 3. PageID #: 30
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Fuse Chicken, LLC Amazon.com

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Summit - Ohio County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Ickes\Holt
217 North Water Street, Suite E, Kent, Ohio 44240
(330) 673-9500

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4
of Business In This State

2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act
120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 400 State Reapportionment
150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking
151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce
152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent - Abbreviated 460 Deportation
Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY 480 Consumer Credit
of Veterans Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud 710 Fair Labor Standards 861 HIA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV
160 Stockholders Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending Act 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/
190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal 720 Labor/Management 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations 864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions
196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts
362 Personal Injury - Product Liability 751 Family and Medical 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: 791 Employee Retirement 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff 896 Arbitration
220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) 899 Administrative Procedure
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 871 IRSThird Party Act/Review or Appeal of
240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 950 Constitutionality of
290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application
446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration
Other 550 Civil Rights Actions
448 Education 555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)
1 Original 2 Removed from 3 Remanded from 4 Reinstated or 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
15 USC 1114, 15 USC 1125, 17 USC 101
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Trademark and copyright infringement, false designation of origin, unfair competition, dilution, State UDAP
VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: Yes No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
07/21/2017 /s/ Joel A. Holt (#0080047)
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Print Save As... Reset

 Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-2 Filed: 07/21/17 2 of 3. PageID #: 31
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

I. Civil Categories: (Please check one category only).

1. General Civil
2. Administrative Review/Social Security
3. Habeas Corpus Death Penalty
*If under Title 28, 2255, name the SENTENCING JUDGE:

CASE NUMBER:
II. RELATED OR REFILED CASES. See LR 3.1 which provides in pertinent part: "If an action is filed or removed to this Court
and assigned to a District Judge after which it is discontinued, dismissed or remanded to a State court, and
subsequently refiled, it shall be assigned to the same Judge who received the initial case assignment without regardfor
the place of holding court in which the case was refiled. Counsel or a party without counsel shall be responsible for
bringing such cases to the attention of the Court by responding to the questions included on the Civil Cover Sheet."

This action is RELATED to another PENDING civil case. This action is REFILED pursuant to LR 3.1.

If applicable, please indicate on page 1 in section VIII, the name of the Judge and case number.

III. In accordance with Local Civil Rule 3.8, actions involving counties in the Eastern Division shall be filed at any of the
divisional offices therein. Actions involving counties in the Western Division shall be filed at the Toledo office. For the
purpose of determining the proper division, and for statistical reasons, the following information is requested.

ANSWER ONE PARAGRAPH ONLY. ANSWER PARAGRAPHS 1 THRU 3 IN ORDER. UPON FINDING WHICH
PARAGRAPH APPLIES TO YOUR CASE, ANSWER IT AND STOP.

(1) Resident defendant. If the defendant resides in a county within this district, please set forth the name of such
county
COUNTY:
Corporation For the purpose of answering the above, a corporation is deemed to be a resident of that county in which
it has its principal place of business in that district.

(2) Non-Resident defendant. If no defendant is a resident of a county in this district, please set forth the county
wherein the cause of action arose or the event complained of occurred.
COUNTY:
Summit County - Ohio
(3) Other Cases. If no defendant is a resident of this district, or if the defendant is a corporation not having a principle
place of business within the district, and the cause of action arose or the event complained of occurred outside
this district, please set forth the county of the plaintiff's residence.
COUNTY:

IV. The Counties in the Northern District of Ohio are divided into divisions as shown below. After the county is
determined in Section III, please check the appropriate division.

EASTERN DIVISION

AKRON (Counties: Carroll, Holmes, Portage, Stark, Summit, Tuscarawas and Wayne)
CLEVELAND (Counties: Ashland, Ashtabula, Crawford, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake,
Lorain, Medina and Richland)
YOUNGSTOWN (Counties: Columbiana, Mahoning and Trumbull)

WESTERN DIVISION

TOLEDO (Counties: Allen, Auglaize, Defiance, Erie, Fulton, Hancock, Hardin, Henry,
Huron, Lucas, Marion, Mercer, Ottawa, Paulding, Putnam, Sandusky, Seneca
VanWert, Williams, Wood and Wyandot)
JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17) Case: 5:17-cv-01538-SL Doc #: 1-2 Filed: 07/21/17 3 of 3. PageID #: 32
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.