2 3 4 5

William C. Conkle (SB# 76103) w.conklectconklelawcorn Mark D. Kremer (SB# 100978) m.kremerAconklelaw.corn CONKLE, KREMER & ENGEL Professional Law Corporation 3130 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500 Santa Monica, California 90403-2351 Phone: (310) 998-9100 Fax: (310) 998-9109

-C
2" 7 " C") r H

-77)

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff Moroccanoil, Inc. 7 8 9 10 11 MOROCCANOIL, INC., a California corporation, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. GIDON ZAFT, an individual; ROYAL 15 MOROCCAN CORP., a Florida corporation; and DOES 1 through 10 16 inc usive, 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
2522.246\9999

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

21T0
COMPLAINT FOR: 1. FEDERAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT [15 U.S.C. 1114] FEDERAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR COMPETITION [15 U.S.C. 1125(a)] DECLARATORY RELIEF 2.

14

Defendant. 3.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

COMPLAINT

1 2 1.

JURISDICTION This action arises under and this Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to

3 15 U.S.C. 1121 (Original Jurisdiction Trademarks), 28 U.S.C. 1331 (Federal 4 Question), 28 U.S.C. 1338(a) (Original Jurisdiction Patents and Trademarks), and 5 28 U.S.C. 1367 (Supplemental Jurisdiction). 6 7 8 2. VENUE Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2) because a

9 substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this District and under 10 28 U.S.C. 1391(c) because Royal Moroccan Corp. is a corporation subject to personal 11 jurisdiction in this District, and under 28 U.S.C. 1391(d) because Defendant Gidon 12 Zaft is an alien. 13 14 15 3. THE PLAINTIFF Moroccanoil, Inc. is a California corporation having a principal place of

16 business at 16311 Ventura Blvd., Ste. 1200, Los Angeles, CA 91436. Moroccanoil, 17 Inc., and its predecessor with which it is joined by statutory merger are referred to as 18 "Moroccanoil" or "Plaintiff'. Moroccanoil distributes products bearing the name and 19 trademark Moroccanoil ("Moroccanoil Products") to authorized distributors throughout 20 the United States. 21 22 23 4. THE DEFENDANTS Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Gidon Zaft, ("Zaft") is

24 either an alien residing in the State of Florida or he is a citizen of the United States, 25 residing in the state of Florida. On information and belief Zaft owns Defendant Royal 26 Moroccan, Corp. ("RMC"). 27 28
2522 246 9999

COMPLAINT

5.

On information and belief, Defendant RMC is a Florida corporation with a

2 principal place of business located at 2797 1st Street, Suite #1401, Fort Meyer, FL 3 33916. RMC is in the business of distributing hair care and personal care products. 4 RMC markets and sells its products through its website at 5 http://www.RoyalMoroccan.com (the "Royal Moroccan Website") throughout the 6 United States, including in Los Angeles County, California. 7 8 10 11 7. Other than as alleged in this Complaint, Plaintiff is ignorant of the true 12 identities and participation of Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues them by 13 such fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes that each of the defendants 14 designated as a Doe is liable in some manner for the acts and omissions, damages and 15 injuries of which Plaintiff alleges in this Complaint. Plaintiff will seek to amend this 16 Complaint to state the true identities of Does 1 through 10 when ascertained. 17 18 8. On information and belief, each of the named defendants, and each of the 19 Doe defendants (collectively "Defendants"), was at all relevant times acting to the 20 fullest extent recognized by law as the agent, employee or co-conspirator of each of the 21 other Defendants and that in committing the acts and omissions alleged herein and 22 causing the damage and injuries alleged, was acting within the scope of such agency, 23 employment, conspiracy, joint venture or partnership relationship. The Defendants 24 have committed acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, have given aid and 25 encouragement to the conspirators and have ratified and adopted the acts of their co26 conspirators. 27 28
2522246\9999

6.

Plaintiff believes there are others who are involved in the acts and

9 omissions of each of the defendants, and sues them by fictitious names DOES 1 - 10.

COMPLAINT

9.

On information and belief, there exists, and at all times herein mentioned

2 there existed, a unity of interests and ownership between Defendants such that any 3 individuality and separateness between the Defendants never existed or has ceased to 4 exist, and the Defendants are in each instance the alter ego of the other Defendants who

control each entity. To adhere to the fiction of the separate existence of the entities as
6 separate and distinct from the Defendants identified with them as owning and 7 controlling them would permit an abuse of the corporate and other entity privileges, 8 would sanction fraud and would promote injustice. 9 10

10.

Plaintiff brought a prior civil action, Moroccanoil, Inc. v. Yair Golan, et

11 al., United States District Court Civil Action No. CV 11-01974 SJO (JEMx) ("Prior i2 Action"). Defendants RMC and Zaft were named as Defendants in the Prior Action by 13 way of a First Amended Complaint filed on January 23, 2012 alleging that they as well 14 as Yair Golan and Y.P. Golan Trade, Ltd. were infringing the intellectual property 15 rights of Moroccanoil, Inc. One of the products giving rise to the Prior Action was the 16 product of RMC that infringed Moroccanoil's rights and is referred to herein as the 17 accused products ("Accused Products"). The Prior Action was set for Trial on 18 November 2, 2012. Prior to the Trial date, U.S. District Court Judge Otero, the trial 19 judge, ordered a series of settlement conferences between Moroccanoil on one hand and 20 all of the Defendants on the other hand. As a result of the Settlement Conferences, 21 Moroccanoil and Y.P. Golan Trade, Ltd. and Yair Golan (the "Golan Defendants") 22 made a settlement. No settlement was made between Moroccanoil and Zaft and RMC 23 (the "Zaft Defendants"). Moroccanoil dismissed without prejudice, its claims against 24 the Zaft Defendants. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the Zaft Defendants, have 25 distributed and sold and continue to distribute and sell, the Accused Product that is 26 shown in the photograph in paragraph 19 below. Plaintiff believes and thereon alleges 27 that the Accused Products infringe Plaintiffs intellectual property rights. The Zaft 28 Defendants never promised not to infringe Plaintiffs intellectual property rights and
2522 246 \9999

-3
COMPLAINT

1 Plaintiff never promised not to sue the Zaft Defendants again for their prior and 2 continuing infringing conduct. 3 4 6 7 12. Plaintiff brings this action to obtain relief against Defendants' 8 infringement of Plaintiffs intellectual property rights and for a declaration that 9 Defendants are infringing Plaintiffs rights. 10 11 12 MOROCCANOIL'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND PRODUCTS 13. Moroccanoil distributes in Los Angeles County and throughout the United 11. On December 3, 2012, the Zaft Defendants informed Plaintiff that they 5 intended to continue to distribute and sell the Accused Products.

13 States a line of professional, "salon only" hair care products under the brand name and 14 trademark "MOROCCANOIL". Products distributed under the Moroccanoil brand 15 ("Moroccanoil Products"). 16 17 14. All of the Moroccanoil Products bear one or more of the federally 18 registered trademarks of Plaintiff, including: the word "MOROCCANOIL" (U.S. Reg. 19 No. 3,478,807), the vertical "M Moroccanoil Design" (U.S. Reg. No. 3,684,910), and 20 the horizontal "M Moroccanoil Design" (U.S. Reg. No. 3,684,909). The trademarks are 21 registered in Class 3 on the Principal Register of the United States Patent and 22 Trademark Office. In addition to the federally registered trademarks, Plaintiff owns 23 trade dress that encompasses the size, shape, color, wording, graphics, packaging and 24 overall appearance of the Moroccanoil Products as well as the placement and position 25 of the Moroccanoil Trademarks on the labels and packaging ("Moroccanoil Trade 26 Dress"). Moroccanoil Trade Dress is non-functional, and inherently distinctive, and has 27 become uniquely associated with Moroccanoil in the marketplace as the source of these 28 products. Moroccanoil owns all right, title and interest in the United States and in other
2522.246\9999

COMPLAINT

-4

1 countries to the Moroccanoil Trademarks and Moroccanoil Trade Dress and the 2 goodwill associated with them (collectively "Moroccanoil Intellectual Property"). 3 4 15. The following images are true and correct photographs of Plaintiff's

5 federally registered trademarks: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 /1 22 USPTO Registration No. 3,684,910 16. USPTO Registration No. 3,684,909 USPTO Registration No. 3,478,807
IRADF:til
PRI:NCI:VAL N.E.(jij

JCCANOIL

Since about January 2007, Plaintiff has continuously used one or more of

23 the Moroccanoil Trademarks in commerce in the United States. Moroccanoil was the 24 first entrant into the market for salon-professional, argan oil based hair care products 25 and has built goodwill and value in the Moroccanoil Trademarks and other intellectual 26 property such that consumers in the United States associate "Moroccanoil" exclusively 27 with it and with Moroccanoil Products. The Moroccanoil Trademarks are inherently 28
2522.246\9999

COMPLAINT

1 distinctive and have acquired secondary meaning in the marketplace. Moroccanoil 2 Products are high-quality beauty products that are held in high regard, and used 3 regularly by successful stylists and salons in Los Angeles County, California and 4 throughout the United States. 5 6 7 THE PERTINENT MOROCCANOIL PRODUCTS 17. Moroccanoil Oil Treatment, Moroccanoir s best selling product, is a

8 viscous mix of argan oil and other ingredients that is a golden colored oil 9 ("Moroccanoil Oil Treatment"). It is packaged in 3.4 fl. ounce, amber colored, 10 druggist-style tempered glass bottles with black screw-on caps. The turquoise, 11 rectangular-shaped front labels of the Moroccanoil Oil Treatment contain the 12 Moroccanoil logo with an orange-colored "M" and the word "Moroccanoil" in white, 13 capital letters vertically up the left hand side of the label. The labels also contain the 14 words "For all hair types," and "alcohol free" in English and Spanish. The turquoise, 15 rectangular-shaped back labels of the Moroccanoil Oil Treatment contain the 16 Moroccanoil logo and a description of the product and its usage in English and Spanish, 17 the ingredient list, and the words "sold exclusively by professional salons." Each bottle 18 of genuine Moroccanoil Oil Treatment includes a sticker that extends from the top of 19 the bottle cap down to the front of the bottle that includes the Moroccanoil logo with an 20 orange "M" with the word "Moroccanoil" through it in white letters, and the words 21 "The Original" in English and Spanish. Each bottle of genuine Moroccanoil Oil 22 Treatment has Moroccanoil Trademarks on it. 23 24 25 26 27 28
2522.2469999

-6
COMPLAINT

1
3 4

18. The following images are true and correct photographs of the front and

2 back sides of genuine Moroccanoil Oil Treatment.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 DEFENDANTS' CONFUSINGLY SIMILAR PRODUCTS 19. On information and belief, Defendants distribute the Accused Product in

17 commerce. An example of an Accused Products bearing the mark ROYAL 18 MOROCCAN in Israel in the packaging depicted below. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
2522.246\9999
'90, tin 11

, Yro:1

Nowt inatmnit Nair type,

20. The Accused Products are an imitation of Moroccanoil Oil Treatment,

2 with a similar but not identical appearance, feel and fragrance. The product name, 3 "Royal Moroccan Serum Treatment," the ROYAL MOROCCAN mark, and the 4 Accused Product's trade dress are confusingly similar to the Moroccanoil Trademarks 5 and Moroccanoil Intellectual Property are likely to confuse and mislead consumers and 6 stylists to believe that Defendants' Accused Products are sponsored by or associated 7 with Plaintiff. 8 9 10 11 21. DEFENDANTS' DISTRIBUTION OF PRODUCTS IN TdE UNITED STATES On information and belief, Defendants operate a website available at

12 http://www.RoyalMoroccan.com, through which they offer to sell the Accused 13 Products in the United States. The website solicits interested distributors to contact 14 Defendants to inquire about distributing the Accused Products in the United States. 15 The Royal Moroccan Website copies many of the same design, layout, colors, and other 16 features of Moroccanoil's website. 17 18 22. Defendants market and distribute the Accused Products in an intentional

19 attempt to unfairly capitalize on Moroccanoil's Trademarks, and the goodwill and 20 reputation of Moroccanoil. Products. Defendants' attempt to confuse consumers into 21 believing the Accused Products are a Moroccanoil Product or is affiliated with 22 Moroccanoil. 23 24 23. The Accused Products have no affiliation with Moroccanoil. The Accused

25 Products are not covered by Moroccanoil's warranty, customer service or its product 26 liability coverage. The Defendants are not authorized or licensed to use the 27 Moroccanoil Trademarks or Moroccanoil Intellectual Property. 28
2522.246\9999

COMPLAINT

-8

24.

On information and belief, Defendants have known about Moroccanoil,

2 Moroccanoil Products, the Moroccanoil Trademarks and the Moroccanoil Intellectual 3 Property since January 2007, when the Moroccanoil Products bearing the Moroccanoil 4 Trademarks were first used in commerce in the United States. 5 6 25. The product name, trade dress and marketing efforts for the Accused

7 Products have been created and used in such a way to create confusion in the 8 marketplace. On information and belief, the acts of Defendants were willful and were 9 committed with the knowledge that such imitation was intended to be used to cause 10 confusion, mistake or to deceive. 11 12 13 14 15 26. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT (AGAINST INFRINGING DEFENDANTS) Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

16 contained in Paragraphs 1 through 25, as if fully set forth herein. 17 18 27. Plaintiff owns the federally registered trademarks for the word

19 "Moroccanoil", Registration Nos. 3,478,807, M Moroccanoil Design No 3,684,909 20 (Vertical lettered Moroccanoil); and M Moroccanoil Design No. 3,684,910. 21 Defendants have infringed Moroccanoil's Trademarks by using the ROYAL 22 MOROCCAN mark for advertising, distribution and sale of the Accused Products 23 without Plaintiffs authorization. 24 25 28. Defendants' use of the ROYAL MOROCCAN mark in their sale and

26 advertising of the Accused Products have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, 27 and have caused confusion and mistake and are likely to continue to cause confusion 28
2522.246\9999

-9
COMPLAINT

1 and mistake, and to deceive the public into believing that the Accused Products 2 originate with, are associated with and/or authorized by Plaintiff. 3 4 29. On information and belief, Defendants have committed these acts of

5 infringement with the intent to cause confusion and mistake and to deceive the public 6 into believing that the Accused Products originate with, are associated with and/or 7 authorized by Plaintiff. 8 9 30. Defendants' unlawful sale and advertising of the Accused Products 10 constitute infringement in violation of Section 32(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 11 1114(1). 12 13 31. On information and belief, Defendants, in engaging in the conduct

14 described herein, knowingly, intentionally and willfully intended to trade on the 15 reputation and goodwill of Plaintiff , the Moroccanoil Trademarks and the Moroccanoil 16 Products, and to cause injury to Plaintiff. 17 18 32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' unlawful acts alleged

19 herein, including infringement of the Moroccanoil Trademarks, Plaintiff has suffered 20 and will continue to suffer injury to its business, goodwill and property. 21 22 33. Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants the damages it has

23 sustained and will sustain as a result of Defendants' wrongful conduct as alleged herein. 24 Plaintiff is also entitled to recover from Defendants the gains, profits, and advantages 25 that Defendants have obtained as a result of the wrongful conduct alleged herein. 26 Plaintiff is presently unable to ascertain the full extent of its damages, or the gains, 27 profits and advantages that Defendants have obtained by reason of their wrongful 28 conduct described herein but alleges that they exceed $100,000.
2522.246\9999

-10
COMPLAINT

34.

Plaintiff demands and is entitled to an accounting from each Defendant,

2 including all information necessary to permit Plaintiff to determine the gains, profits 3 and advantages that Defendants have obtained by reason of their wrongful conduct 4 described herein. 35. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Monetary compensation will not

7 afford Moroccanoil adequate relief. Defendants' acts and omissions as alleged herein 8 will engender the need for a multiplicity of judicial proceedings and will cause damages 9 to Plaintiff that are difficult, if not impossible, to measure. Unless Defendants are 10 preliminarily and permanently enjoined from committing the unlawful acts alleged 11 including infringement of the Moroccanoil Trademarks, Plaintiff will continue to suffer 12 irreparable harm. Injunctive relief is therefore appropriate pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 13 1116 to prevent Defendants from engaging in any further violations of 15 U.S.C. 14 1114. 15 16 17 18 19 20 36. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR FEDERAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (AGAINST INFRINGING DEFENDANTS) Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

21 contained in Paragraphs 1 through 35, as if fully set forth herein. 22 23 37. Defendants' acts, including its acts of false advertising, trade dress 24 infringement and unfair competition are likely to cause confusion or to cause mistake or 25 to deceive as to the affiliation, sponsorship, or association of the Accused Products with 26 Plaintiff, or as to the origin, sponsorship or approval of the Accused Products by 27 Plaintiff. Defendants' conduct constitutes infringement of Moroccanoil' s unregistered 28
2522.246\9999

COMPLAINT

1 trademarks and trade dress, as well as, unfair competition. Such conduct is prohibited 2 by 15 U.S.C. 1125(a). 3 4 38. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' unlawful acts as set forth herein, including infringement of the Moroccanoil Trademarks, the Moroccanoil 6 Intellectual Property, and Defendants' unfair competition, Plaintiff has suffered and 7 will continue to suffer injury to its business, goodwill and property. 8 9 39. As a proximate result of Defendants' wrongful conduct, Defendants have 10 been unjustly enriched while Plaintiff has suffered damages of a nature and in an 11 amount according to proof at trial. 12 13 40. Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants the damages it has 14 sustained and will sustain as a result of Defendants' 'wrongful conduct as alleged herein 15 which Plaintiff believes exceeds $100,000. Plaintiff is also entitled to recover from 16 Defendants the gains, profits, and advantages that Defendants have obtained as a result 17 of the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Plaintiff is presently unable to ascertain the full 18 extent of its damages, or the gains, profits and advantages that Defendants have 19 obtained by reason of their wrongful conduct described herein. 20 21 41. Plaintiff demands and is entitled to an accounting from each Defendant, 22 including all information necessary to permit Plaintiff to determine the gains, profits 23 and advantages that Defendants have obtained by reason of their wrongful conduct 24 described herein. 25 26 42. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Monetary compensation will not 27 afford Plaintiff adequate relief. Defendants' acts and omissions as alleged herein will 28 engender the need for a multiplicity of judicial proceedings and will cause damages to
2522.246\9999

COMPLAINT

-12

1 Plaintiff that are difficult, if not impossible, to measure. Unless Defendants are 2 preliminarily and permanently enjoined from committing the unlawful acts alleged, 3 including infringement of the Moroccanoil Trademarks, Plaintiff will continue to suffer 4 irreparable harm. Injunctive relief is therefore appropriate pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 5 1116 to prevent Defendants from engaging in any further violations of 15 U.S.C. 6 1125(a). 7 8 43. Defendants' acts and omissions as alleged herein were committed 9 knowingly, intentionally and willfully with the intent to trade on Plaintiff's goodwill in 10 the Moroccanoil Products, the Moroccanoil Trademarks and trade dress. As such, this 11 is an exceptional case within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. 1117(a) and damages should 12 be trebled and attorneys' fees awarded. 13 14 15 16 17 44. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF DECLARATORY RELIEF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

18 contained in Paragraphs 1 through 43, as if fully set forth herein. 19 20 45. A genuine dispute and controversy exists between the parties concerning 21 their respective rights, duties and obligations with respect to the Moroccanoil 22 Trademarks, Moroccanoil Intellectual Property and the Accused Products. 23 24 46. The use by Defendants of the mark ROYAL MOROCCAN for the 25 Accused Products is likely to create confusion with Plaintiff as to the source of the 26 goods. The Moroccanoil Products and the Accused Products are nearly identical. 27 Moroccanoil Products and the Accused Products are advertised and sold in the same 28 trade channels.
2522.24619999

COMPLAINT

-13

47.

Plaintiff requests the Court to declare that the Accused Products are likely

2 to infringe and cause consumer confusion as to the source and origin of the Accused 3 Products, and to confuse consumers of the Accused Products to falsely believe that the 4 Defendants' products are made by, associated with, or sponsored by Plaintiff. 5 6 48. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Monetary compensation will not 7 afford Plaintiff adequate relief. Defendants' acts and omissions as alleged herein will 8 engender the need for a multiplicity of judicial proceedings and will cause damages to 9 Plaintiff that are difficult, if not impossible, to measure. Unless Defendants are ordered 10 to refrain from committing the unlawful acts alleged, including infringement of the 11 Moroccanoil Trademarks, Plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm. Declaratory and 12 injunctive relief is therefore appropriate pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1116 to prevent 13 Defendants from engaging in any further violations of 15 U.S.C. 1114 and 1125. 14 15 16 17 18 19 1. For an adjudication that the mark ROYAL MOROCCAN on the Accused 20 Products is likely to infringe and cause confusion in respect of the Moroccanoil 21 Trademarks for the goods specified in the Royal Moroccan Application; 22 23 25 26 28
2522.246\9999

PRAYER WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for an award as follows:

2.

For adjudication that Royal Moroccan's trade dress is likely to infringe

24 and cause confusion in respect of the Moroccanoil Trade Dress for hair care goods; 3. For a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from

27 marketing or selling the Accused Products;

-14
COMPLAINT

4.

For preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against all Defendants,

2 and each of them, and their officers, agents, attorneys, representatives and assi gns, and 3 all persons acting in active concert or participation with them, from doing any of the 4 following acts, either directly or indirectly, and from doing any act prefatory to the 5 prohibited acts: 6 7 9 10 12 13 c. Causing a likelihood of confusion, deception, or mistake as to the 14 source, nature, or quality of Plaintiffs goods or causing confusion, deception or 15 mistake as to the source, nature or quality of Defendants' goods; 16 17 19 20 e. Violating any statute, decision, rule or regulation of any 21 governmental entity in the course of the offering, disposition or sales of any of the 22 Accused Products; 23 24 f. Soliciting, assisting, aiding or abetting any other person or business 25 entity in engaging in or performing any of the activities referred to in the above 26 subparagraphs "a" through "e". 27 28
2522.246\9999

a.

Using any of Moroccanoil 's Trademarks, in a maimer prohibited by

8 law or regulation; b. Otherwise infringing any trademark, trade dress or other intellectual

11 property right owned or controlled by Plaintiff;

d.

Using any false designation of origin or false representation

18 concerning any of Defendants' goods;

-15
COMPLAINT

5.

For an order directing Defendants, and each of them, to file with this Court

2 and serve on Plaintiff within 30 days after service of an injunction, a report in writing 3 under oath, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendants have 4 complied with the injunction; 5 6 6. For an order requiring Defendants, and each of them, to deliver to Plaintiff 7 all products, literature, advertising, and other material bearing any infringing 8 trademarks or a use of any trademark constituting federal, California state or common 9 law unfair competition; 10 11 7. For an order requiring Defendants to account for all sales and transfers of 12 any of the Accused Products, including an order that they submit to Plaintiff 13 immediately all records of all purchases, sales, and other materials pertaining to the 14 acquisition and distribution of the Accused Products; 15 16 18 19 9. For an award of money damages in the amount of at least $100,000 20 pursuant to the remedies as provided by 15 U.S.C. 1116, 1117; 1125; and all other 21 statutory and common law bases; 22 23 25 26 11. For an order requiring that all gains, profits, or advantages derived by 27 Defendants by their wrongful conduct be disgorged to Plaintiff to the fullest extent 28 allowed by law;
2522.246\9999

8.

For an accounting from each Defendant of all profits, monies and

17 advantages that Defendants have obtained by reason of their wrongful conduct;

10.

For damages in an amount according to proof at trial and trebled as

24 permitted by law;

COMPLAINT

-16

12.

For punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to punish

2 defendants and defer such conduct in the future; 3 4 13. For attorneys' fees;

6 7 8 9

14.

For costs; and

15.

For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

10 Dated: December 4, 2012 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Dated: December 4, 2012 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

252224619999

William C. Conkle Mark D. Kremer, members of CONKLE, KREMER & ENGEL Professional Law Corporation

By: William C. Conkle Attorneys for Plaintiff Moroccanoil, Inc.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all triable issues.

William C. Conkle Mark D. Kremer, members of CONKLE, KREMER & ENGEL Professional Law Corporation

William C. Conkle Attorneys for Plaintiff Moroccanoil, Inc.

-17
COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENT L DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY This case has been assigned to District Judge John F. Walter and the assigned discovery Magistrate Judge is Frederick F. Mumm. The case number on all documents Wed with the Court should read as follows: CV12 - 10422 JFW (FFMx) Pursuant to General Order 05-07 of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the Magistrate Judge has been designated to hear discovery related motions.

All discovery related motions should be noticed on the calendar of the Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO COUNSEL A copy of this notice must be served with the summons and complaint on all defendants (if a removal action is
filed, a copy of this notice must be served on all plaintiffs).

Subsequent documents must be filed at the following location: krWestern Division 312 N. Spring St., Rm. G-8 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Li Southern Division 411 West Fourth St., Rm. 1-053 Santa Ana, CA 92701-4516 Eastern Division 3470 Twelfth St., Rm. 134 Riverside, CA 92501

Failure to file at the proper location will result in your documents being returned to you.

CV-18 (03/06)

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT

TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL COVER SHEET
I (a) PLAINTIFFS (Check box if you arc representing yourself

II

DEFENDANTS

Moroccanoil, Inc., a California corporation

Gidon Zaft, an individual, Royal Moroccan Corporation, a Florida corporation; and Does 1 through 10, inclusive
Attorneys (If Known

(b) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number. If you are representing yourself, provide same.)

William C. Conkle Conke, Kremer & Engel, PLC 3130 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 500 Santa Monica, CA 90403 310-998-9100
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an Xin one box only.)

III.

CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES - For Diversity Cases Only (Place an X in one box for plaintiff and one for defendant.)
PTF iX 1 1 12 DEF

1 U.S. Government Plaintiff

I X 3 Federal Question (U.S.

Government Not a Party)

Citizen of This State

PTF
of Business in this State 2 Incorporated and Principal Place of Business in Another State Foreign Nation

DEF
4 4

I 1 Incorporated or Principal Place

I 1

I_

1 2 U.S. Government Defendant

j - 4 Diversity (Indicate Citizenship I

of Parties in Item 111)

Citizen of Another Stale 1

Li 5 1 16

Citizen or Subject of a Foreign Country IV. ORIGIN (Place an X in one box only.)
1 1 Original

13

Li 3

'111 6 1

1-x

I I2 Removed from
State Court

, 3 Remanded from 1
Appellate Court

Proceeding

14 Reinstated or 1 Reopened

5 Transferred from another district (specify):

[ 16 Multi- Li 7 Appeal to District

District Litigation Judge from Magistrate Judge

V.

REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND:

Yes

1 No (Check 'Yes' only if demanded in complaint.)

CLASS ACTION under F.R.C.P. 23: L_J Yes ENT No VI.

I X MONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT: S 1 00.000

CAUSE OF ACTION (Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and write a brief statement of,cause. Do not cite ,jurisdictional statutes unless diversity.)

15 U.S.C. 1121 (Original Jurisdiction - Trademarks), 28 U.S.C. 1331 (Federal Question), 28 U.S.C. 1338(a) (Original Jurisdiction - Patents and Trademarks), and 28 U.S.C. 1367 (Supplemental Jurisdiction).
VII. NAT URE

OF SUIT (Place an X in one box oI

CONTRACT TORTS PERSONAL. INJURY _J 310 Airplane 1 1 315 Airplane Product Liability I 1320 Assault, Libel & Slander 330 Fed. Employers' Liability 1 1340 Marine II 345 Marine Product Liability I _ J 350 Motor Vehicle 17.] 355 Motor Vehicle L. Product Liability 1 360 Other Personal Injury 1362 Personal InjuryMed Malpractice ' 1365 Personal InjuryProduct Liability 1 I 368 Asbestos Personal Injury Product Liability TORTS PERSON , PROPERTY PRISONER LABOR

()'ri-IHR STALL . I1ES

L___1400 State Reapportionment I 1410 Antitrust I _1430 Banks and Banking LEI 450 Commerce/ICC Rates/etc. L.1460 Deportation

I I 110 Insurance t_EJ 120 Marine I

I_ 1130 Miller Act 1140 Negotiable Instrument 1150 Recovery of Overpayment & Enforcement of Judgment

PETITIONS

1___I 370 Other Fraud

1_137 l Truth in Lending

510 Motions to Vacate Sentence L Habeas Corpus

F_: 380 Other Personal

1

530 General 535 Death Penalty

Property Damage '

1470 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations .1480 Consumer Credit

1 385 Property Damage I___J 540 Mandamus/ Product Liability Other DANKR1 jpTc y

710 Fair Labor Standards Act 720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations 1 730 Labor/Mgmt, Reporting & Disclosure Act 1 740 Railway Labor Ac , I 790 Other Labor Litigation 791 Empl. Ret. Inc. Security Act

_...i 490 Cable/Sat TV

I 810 Selective Service = '850 Securities/Commodities/ 1153 Recovery of Overpayment of Exchange Veteran's Benefits I _1875 Customer Challenge 12 T _I 160 Stockholders' Suits USC 3410 1190 Other Contract L 890 Other Statutory Actions , ......... 891 Agricultural Act 195 Contract Product I Liability I 892 Economic Stabilization I _111)(2 Franchis2 Act REAL PROPER IY L] 893 Environmental Matters 1 1894 Energy Allocation Act C 1_1895 Freedom of Info. Act

' 151 Medicare Act 1'152 Recovery' of Defaulted Student Loan (Excl. 'Veterans)

550 Civil Rights FORFEITURE/ PEN,-ALTY

I 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 L__i 423 Withdrawal 7

TTCC ' "

L --- 15 55 Prison Condition Condition -- -

I 1210 Land Condemnation

' I. II. Rn 141 Voting I 1442 Employment I 443 Housing/Accommodations 1 I 444 Welfare 1445 American with Disabilities Employment

1
1

Li900 Appeal of Fee DetermiI--1950

nation Under Equal Access to Justice Constitutionality of State Statutes

220 Foreclosure 1230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 1 F1240 Torts to Land 1 1245 Tort Product Liability 1 Li290 All Other Real Property

PYIVII(.110.T1ON 1 C. 1 446 American with Disabilities , 462 Naturalization Other Application 1440 Other Civil 7I 463 Habeas CorpusRights Alien Detainee 1465 Other Immigration Actions

PRI)I'llRI-n RIG, , _....... 610 Agriculture IL___I 620 Other Food & 820 Copyrights Drug j 830 Patent 1 1625 Drug Related X I 'llr'l Trademark (.11.1'..,IAI, SECURITY Seizure of Property 21 USC 1 1 861 HIA (1395ff) 881 _ _l 862 Black Lung (923) I 1 630 Liquor Laws 863 DIWC/D1WW (405(g)) I 1 640 R.R. & Truck L._] 650 Airline Regs I 1864 SSID Title XVI 1 I 660 Occupational I ._ I 865 RS1 (4 4'i 711 FIT' I : ' 'd., TAX SUITS Safety/Health 1 690 Other 1 ' 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or Defendant) L 1 871 IRS - Third Party 26 USC 7609

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Case Number: AFTER COMPLETING THE FRONT SIDE OF FOR I CV-71, COMPLETE THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BE .OW.
CV-71 (05/08)

i on

CIVIL COVER SHEET

Page 1 of 2
CCD-.1S44

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL COVER SHEET VIII(a). IDENTICAL CASES: Has this action been previously filed in this court and dismissed, remanded or closed? If yes, list case number(s): No X Yes

CV l 1-01974 SJO (JEMx) - See Attachment

No X Yes

VIII(b). RELATED CASES: Have any cases been previously tiled in this court that are related to the present case? 1 If yes, list case number(s):

CV 11-01974 SJO (JEMx) - See Attachment

1 X I A. Arise from the same or closely related transactions, happenings, or events; or

Civil eases are deemed related if a previously filed case and the present case: (Check all boxes that apply)

LX p( I

D. Call for determination of the same or substantially related or similar questions of law and fact; or C. For other reasons would entail substantial duplication of labor if heard by different judges; or D. Involve the same patent, trademark or copyright, and one of the factors identified above in a, h ore also is present.

IX. VENUE: (When completing the following information, use an additional sheet if necessary.) (a) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country,in which EACH named plaintiff resides. Check here if the government, its agencies or employees is a named plaintiff. If this box is checked, go to item (b). County in this D s et:" California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country

Los Angeles
(h) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which EACH named defendant resides. Check here if the government, its agencies or employees is a named defendant. If this box is checked, no to item (c). County in this District.*

California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country

Florida
(c) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which EACH claim arose. Note: In land condemnation cases, use the location of the tract of land involved. County in this District:* California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country

California
* Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, Santa Barbara, or San Luis Obispo Counties Note: in land condemnation cases, use the location of the tc.t,,of land X. SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PRO PER): t Date

December 4, 2012

William C. Conkle
Notice to Counsel/Parties: The CV-71 (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. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required pursuant to Local Rule 3-1 is not filed but is used by the Clerk of the Court for the purpose of statistics, venue and initiating the civil docket sheet. (For more detailed instructions. see separate instructions sheet.) Key to Statistical codes relating to Social Security Cases: Nature of Suit Code 861 Abbreviation HLA Substantive Statement of Cause of Action All claims for health insurance benefits (Medicare) under Title 18, Part A, of the Social Security Act, as amended. Also, include claims by hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, etc., for certification as providers of services under the program. (42 U.S.C. 1935FF(b)) All claims for "Black Lung" benefits under Title 4, Part B, of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. (30 U.S.C. 923) All claims filed by insured workers for disability insurance benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended; plus all claims filed for child's insurance benefits based on disability. (42 U.S.C. 405(g)) All claims filed for widows or widowers insurance benefits based on disability under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended. (42 U.S.C. 405(g)) All claims for supplemental security income payments based upon disability filed under Title 16 of the Social Security Act, as amended. All claims for retirement (old age) and survivors benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act,as amended. (42 U. S .0 (0) CIVIL COVER SHEET Page 2 of 2

862

BL

863

DIWC

863

DIWW

864

SSID

865

RSI

CV-71 (05/08)

1 2 3

ATTACHMENT

There was a prior action, Civil Action No. CV 11-01974 SJO (JEMx), between Moroccanoil, Inc. and

4 defendants Gidon Zaft, Royal Moroccan Corp and two other defendants, Yair Golan and Y.P. Golan 5 6 7 8 9 Trade, concerning the same products that infringed the same three trademarks that are owned by Moroccanoil, Inc., No. 3,478,807 filed January I, 2007; No. 3,684,909 filed March 11, 2007; and No. 3,684,910 filed March 11, 2007. The Prior Action was dismissed without prejudice as part of a settlement package resulting from 4 days of settlement discussions presided over by U.S. District Court Judge Otero that commenced on the date of the Pre-Trial Conference in the Prior Action. Judge Otero

10 dealt with Defendants Zaft and Royal Moroccan Corp. a number of times during the settlement 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23

negotiations. A confidential settlement was made between Plaintiff Moroccanoil, Inc. and Defendants Yair Golan and YP Trading. Judge Otero is familiar with the facts in the Prior Action, the facts underlying this action, and the facts in the other related litigation pending in different parts of the world.

Zaft and Royal Moroccan Corp. chose not to settle even after a discussion that they would probably be sued soon by Moroccanoil. This is that suit.

24 25 26
AO 72 (Rev. 8/82)

A0-72