Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:1

1 Jordan Susman, Esq. (SBN 246116)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

jsusman@nolanheimann.com
Margo Arnold, Esq. (SBN 278288)
marnold@nolanheimann.com
NOLAN HEIMANN LLP
16133 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 820
Encino, California 91436
Telephone: (818) 574-5710
Facsimile: (818) 574-5689
Attorneys for Plaintiff Garrapata, LLC

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

GARRAPATA, LLC, a California limited )
12 liability company,
)
)
13
Plaintiff,
)
14
vs.
)
)
15
NOROK INNOVATION, INC. a Florida )
16 corporation; ERIC POPOWICZ, an
)
)
17 individual; CBD GREEN LABS, a
California non-profit; AJAY NARAYAN, )
18 an individual; EUGENE NEMIROVSKY, )
)
19 an individual; RUSLANA
NEMIROVSKY, an individual; RONALD )
20 J. BRIGGS, an individual; BRUCE E.
)
)
21 VANCE, an individual; NATURAL
STRESS SOLUTIONS, LLC, a Michigan )
22 limited liability company; MABSUT LIFE )
23 US CORP., a Florida corporation, DOES )
1-30, inclusive,
)
24
)
Defendants.
)
25
)

Case No.:
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1. VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL CODE SECTION 3344;
2. VIOLATION OF COMMON LAW
RIGHT OF PUBLICITY;
3. FALSE ENDORSEMENT
UNDER THE LANHAM ACT
(15 U.S.C. § 1125(A));
4. TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
(15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)(A));
5. COMMON LAW TRADEMARK
INFRINGEMENT
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

26
27
28

-1COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 2 of 17 Page ID #:2

1

Plaintiff Garrapata, LLC, by and through its undersigned attorneys, alleges

2 upon knowledge as to itself and its own acts and alleges upon information and belief
3 as to all other matters, brings this Complaint.

INTRODUCTION

4
5

1.

For more than 60 years, Clint Eastwood has been one of the most

6 famous actors, producers, and directors in the world. Mr. Eastwood is fiercely
7 protective of his name and image, and has rarely licensed either for the promotion of
8 products outside of the movies he acted in or directed. Like many of his most
9 famous characters, Mr. Eastwood is not afraid to confront wrongdoing and hold
10 accountable those that try to illegally profit off his name. Indeed, Mr. Eastwood
11 previously litigated and won a jury trial against the National Enquirer, which was
12 affirmed on appeal, after the tabloid falsely claimed to have exclusively interviewed
13 Mr. Eastwood and misappropriated his name, likeness, and personality to promote
14 and sell its product.
15

2.

This action arises from an online Internet scam that illegally uses Mr.

16 Eastwood’s celebrity and name to drive traffic to an online marketplace selling
17 cannabidiol (“CBD”) products and to promote CBD products thereon. Put simply,
18 without Mr. Eastwood’s knowledge of permission, online retailers of CBD products
19 strategically place Mr. Eastwood’s name within blog posts and webpage meta
20 descriptions (content that describes and summarizes the contents of a given webpage
21 for the benefit of users and search engines to locate) as a means to promote CBD
22 products and guide customers to an online marketplace that sells defendants’ CBD
23 products.
24

3.

The unlawful actions by the defendants amount to a willful and

25 conscious disregard for Mr. Eastwood’s rights and are intentionally designed to
26 capitalize on the goodwill, recognition, and fame associated with Mr. Eastwood.
27
28

4.

By this action, Garrapata LLC, the holder of all relevant rights in Mr.
-2COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 3 of 17 Page ID #:3

1 Eastwood’s name and persona, seeks to hold accountable the persons and entities
2 that wrongfully crafted this scheme and illegally profited off of Mr. Eastwood’s
3 name to promote and sell CBD products.

PARTIES

4
5

5.

Plaintiff Garrapata, LLC (“Garrapata”) is a California limited liability

6 company with its principal place of business in Los Angeles County, California. By
7 assignment from Mr. Eastwood, Garrapata holds all trademarks related to Mr.
8 Eastwood and Mr. Eastwood’s name and persona rights apart from those he grants in
9 connection with the promotion and exploitation of the films he makes.
10

6.

Defendant Norok Innovation, Inc. is a Florida corporation with its

11 principal place of business in Los Angeles, California. It is the manufacturer,
12 distributor and seller of CBD products called Terahemp.
13

7.

Defendant Eric Popowicz is an individual and resident of Los Angeles

14 County, California. He is the CEO of Norok Innovation, Inc. and was a principal of
15 Norok Innovation, LLC, which was a manufacturer, distributor and seller of
16 Terahemp. At all relevant times discussed herein, Norok Innovation, Inc. was the
17 alter ego of Popowicz, and there exists, and at all times herein mentioned has
18 existed, a unity of interest and ownership between and among Norok Innovation,
19 Inc. and Popowicz such that any separateness has ceased to exist. Norok Innovation,
20 Inc. and Popowicz have commingled personal and corporate funds, and Popowicz
21 has used corporate assets for personal uses. Norok Innovation, Inc. has disregarded
22 necessary legal formalities that corporate entities must follow, and Popowicz uses
23 Norok Innovation, Inc. in an attempt to evade liability for his own unlawful actions.
24 Consequently, adherence to the fiction of the separate existence of Norok
25 Innovation, Inc. as an entity distinct from Popowicz would permit an abuse of the
26 corporate privilege and would sanction fraud and promote injustice in that the acts
27 alleged herein were the result of Norok Innovation, Inc.’s acts, however, Popowicz
28

-3COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 4 of 17 Page ID #:4

1 benefitted from the acts alleged herein.
2

8.

Defendant CBD Green Labs is a California non-profit with its principal

3 place of business in Orange County, California. CBD Green Labs is the
4 manufacturer, distributor, and seller of CBD products called CBD Greenlab.
5

9.

Defendant Ajay Narayan is an individual and resident of Orange

6 County, California. He is the principal of CBD Green Labs. At all relevant times
7 discussed herein, CBD Green Labs was the alter ego of Narayan, and there exists,
8 and at all times herein mentioned has existed, a unity of interest and ownership
9 between and among CBD Green Labs and Narayan such that any separateness has
10 ceased to exist. CBD Green Labs and Narayan have commingled personal and
11 corporate funds, and Narayan has used corporate assets for personal uses. CBD
12 Green Labs has disregarded necessary legal formalities that corporate entities must
13 follow, and Narayan uses CBD Green Labs in an attempt to evade liability for his
14 own unlawful actions. Consequently, adherence to the fiction of the separate
15 existence of CBD Green Labs as an entity distinct from Narayan would permit an
16 abuse of the corporate privilege and would sanction fraud and promote injustice in
17 that the acts alleged herein were the result of CBD Green Labs’ acts, however,
18 Narayan benefitted from the acts alleged herein.
19

10.

Defendant Eugene Nemirovsky is an individual and resident of Contra

20 Costa County, California. He was the CEO of Farmacy Bliss, Inc., which was
21 previously a Delaware corporation that was registered to do business in California.
22 Farmacy Bliss, Inc. was dissolved in 2018 and surrendered its right to do business in
23 California the same year. Accordingly, Eugene Nemirovsky is a manufacturer,
24 distributor, and seller of CBD products called Farmacy Bliss.
25

11.

Defendant Ruslana Nemirovsky is an individual and resident of Contra

26 Costa County, California. She was a principal of Farmacy Bliss, Inc, which was
27 previously a Delaware corporation that was registered to do business in California.
28

-4COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 5 of 17 Page ID #:5

1 Farmacy Bliss, Inc. was dissolved in 2018 and surrendered its right to do business in
2 California the same year. Accordingly, Ruslana Nemirovsky is a manufacturer,
3 distributor, and seller of CBD products called Farmacy Bliss.
4

12.

Defendant Ronald J. Briggs is an individual and resident of Broward

5 County, Florida. He was the President of Creating Better Days, Inc., which was
6 previously a Florida corporation. Creating Better Days, Inc. was dissolved in 2017.
7 Accordingly, Briggs is a manufacturer, distributor, and seller of CBD products
8 called Creating Better Days.
9

13.

Defendant Bruce E. Vance is an individual and resident of Broward

10 County, Florida. He was the Vice President of Creating Better Days, Inc., which
11 was previously a Florida corporation. Creating Better Days, Inc. was dissolved in
12 2017. Accordingly, Vance is a manufacturer, distributor, and seller of CBD
13 products called Creating Better Days.
14

14.

Defendant Natural Stress Solutions, LLC is a Michigan limited liability

15 company with its principal place of business in Genesee County, Michigan. It is the
16 manufacturer, distributor and seller of CBD products called Natural Stress Solutions.
17

15.

Defendant Mabsut Life US Corp. is a Florida corporation with its

18 principal place of business in Dade County, Florida. It is the manufacturer,
19 distributor and seller of CBD products called PhenoPen.
20

16.

Garrapata is unaware of the true names and capacities of defendants,

21 whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, named herein as Does 1
22 through 30, inclusive, and therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names
23 (the “Doe Defendants”). Garrapata will seek leave to amend this Complaint to state
24 when their true names and capacities are ascertained. (All of the Defendants,
25 including the Doe Defendants, collectively are referred to herein as “Defendants”).
26

17.

At all times mentioned in this Complaint, all of the Defendants acted in

27 concert to knowingly cause, facilitate, control, induce, or otherwise participate in the
28

-5COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 6 of 17 Page ID #:6

1 wrongful conduct alleged herein.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2
3

18.

The Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and

4 1338(a). This is a civil action arising under federal law, the Lanham Act of 1946 as
5 amended (codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051, et seq.). The pendent state law claims are so
6 related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy
7 pursuant to Article III of the United States Constitution. The Court therefore has
8 supplemental jurisdiction over those claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
9

19.

Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)

10 for several independent reasons, including: at least one of the Defendants “resides”
11 in this judicial district for venue purposes under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(2); a
12 substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in this
13 district.
14

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

15

Clint Eastwood

16

20.

Clint Eastwood is recognized around the world as an icon of the

17 entertainment industry. After rising to fame in the 1950s as the star of the TV series
18 Rawhide, Mr. Eastwood became one of the world’s biggest movie stars with his roles
19 as the “Man With No Name” in a series of Westerns in the late 1960s and the Dirty
20 Harry films of the 1970s and 80s. In 1971, Mr. Eastwood directed his first of more
21 than 30 motion pictures, including the Academy Award winning Best Pictures
22 Unforgiven (1992) and Million Dollar Baby (2004). In addition to his successful
23 career in the entertainment industry, Mr. Eastwood served as the mayor of Carmel24 by-the-Sea in the late-1980s. In 2006, Mr. Eastwood was inducted into the California
25 Hall of Fame located at The California Museum for History, Women, and the Arts.
26 According to fellow Academy Award winner Sean Penn, Mr. Eastwood “has become
27 cinema’s Mount Rushmore . . . [and] the embodiment of American film.”
28

-6COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 7 of 17 Page ID #:7

1

21.

Mr. Eastwood has a long-standing history of rejecting third party

2 licenses. With rare exception, Mr. Eastwood reserves the exploitation of his
3 personality rights and the goodwill associated therewith for his motion pictures and
4 other entertainment related projects, and for business ventures in which he is
5 personally involved.
6

22.

Mr. Eastwood does not have, and never has had, any association with the

7 manufacture, promotion, and/or sale of any CBD products.

Defendants’ Scheme To Defraud The Public

8
9

23.

The Internet is a global network of interconnected computers which

10 allows individuals and organizations around the world to communicate and to share
11 information with one another.
12

24.

Each web page has a corresponding domain address, which is an

13 identifier somewhat analogous to a telephone number or street address. Domain
14 names consist of a second-level domain—simply a term or series of terms—followed
15 by a top-level domain, many of which describe the nature of the enterprise.
16

25.

Search engines like Google look for keywords in places such as domain

17 names, actual text on the web page, and metatags. Metatags are Hypertext Markup
18 Language (“HTML”) code intended to describe the contents of the web site. There
19 are different types of metatags, including “description” and “keyword” metatags. The
20 description metatags are intended to describe the web site; the keyword metatags, at
21 least in theory, contain keywords relating to the contents of the web site. Metatags
22 function behind the scenes to direct an internet searcher to a webpage. “Using
23 another’s trademark in one’s metatags is much like posting a sign with another’s
24 trademark in front of one’s store.” Brookfield Commc'ns, Inc. v. W. Coast Entm't
25 Corp., 174 F.3d 1036, 1064 (9th Cir. 1999).
26

26.

Among the top results of an online search for “Clint Eastwood CBD” is

27 a website for online-cbd-shop.com, with the search result “clint eastwood cbd
28

-7COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 8 of 17 Page ID #:8

1 products – bio cbn drugs.” Below and attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and
2 correct image of page 2 of such a Google search.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

27.

When one clicks on the link for online-cbd-shop.com in the online

19 search results, it takes the consumer to an online CBD marketplace called CBD
20 Online with a list and photographs of what it touts as “61 PRODUCTS FOUND FOR
21 ‘CLINT EASTWOOD CBD PRODUCTS.’” Below and attached hereto as Exhibit 2
22 is a true and correct image of page 1 of the webpage for online-cbd-shop.com that
23 one arrives at after clicking on the search result.
24
25
26
27
28

-8COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 9 of 17 Page ID #:9

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

28.

The CBD products advertised and sold at the CBD Online marketplace

14 based upon a Google search for “Mr. Eastwood CBD” include Natural Stress
15 Solutions, Farmacy Bliss, CBD Greenlab, Terahemp, Creating Better Days, and
16 PhenoPen.
17

29.

By using Mr. Eastwood’s name in hidden metatags, Defendants have

18 figuratively posted a sign with Mr. Eastwood’s trademark in front of their online
19 store to attract consumers and caused the consuming public to believe that Mr.
20 Eastwood is associated with and/or endorsed the CBD Online marketplace
21 Defendants’ CBD products, when no such association actually exists.
22

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

23

(Violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 3344 – Garrapata Against All Defendants)

24

30.

Garrapata incorporates all prior allegations of this Complaint by this

25 reference.
26

31.

Garrapata is the owner of the rights of publicity in Mr. Eastwood’s

27 name, image, likeness, and persona for all purposes, other than those related to the
28

-9COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 10 of 17 Page ID #:10

1 promotion and exploitation of the motion pictures Mr. Eastwood makes.

32.

2

Defendants have willfully and without authorization used Mr.

3 Eastwood’s name for commercial purposes, to direct consumers to CBD Online,
4 which was created by and/or is owned and/or maintained by Defendants, and to
5 promote the sale of CBD products including Natural Stress Solutions, Farmacy Bliss,
6 CBD Greenlab, Terahemp, Creating Better Days, and PhenoPen, which are
7 manufactured, distributed and/or sold by Defendants.

33.

8

Defendants’ unauthorized use of Mr. Eastwood’s name constitutes a

9 commercial misappropriation in violation of Section 3344 of the California Civil
10 Code.
11

34.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct,

12 Garrapata has suffered, and will continue to suffer, damages in an amount to be
13 proven at trial.
14

35.

Defendants have further been unjustly enriched by their

15 misappropriation of Mr. Eastwood’s statutory right of publicity. Accordingly,
16 Garrapata is entitled to restitution of all income, profits, and other benefits resulting
17 from Defendants’ conduct, in an amount to be determined according to proof at trial.
18

36.

Defendants’ actions as alleged herein were malicious, oppressive, and

19 fraudulent, and done with the intent to injure Mr. Eastwood and with a willful and
20 conscious disregard for Mr. Eastwood’s rights. As a result, Garrapata is entitled to
21 recover from Defendants punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to
22 punish and deter them and others from engaging in such acts in the future.
23

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

24

(Violation of Common Law Right of Publicity – Garrapata Against All

25

Defendants)

26

37.

Garrapata incorporates all prior allegations of this Complaint by this

27 reference.
28

-10COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 11 of 17 Page ID #:11

1

38.

Garrapata is the owner of the common law rights of publicity in Mr.

2 Eastwood’s name, image, likeness, and persona necessary for endorsement deals.
3

39.

Defendants have willfully and without authorization used Mr.

4 Eastwood’s name for commercial purposes, to direct consumers to CBD Online,
5 which was created by and/or is owned and/or maintained by Defendants, and to
6 promote the sale of CBD products including Natural Stress Solutions, Farmacy Bliss,
7 CBD Greenlab, Terahemp, Creating Better Days, and PhenoPen, which are
8 manufactured, distributed and/or sold by Defendants and each of them.
9

40.

Defendants’ unauthorized use of Mr. Eastwood’s name constitutes a

10 violation of California’s common law right of publicity.
11

41.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct,

12 Garrapata has suffered, and will continue to suffer, damages in an amount to be
13 proven at trial.
14

42.

Defendants have further been unjustly enriched by their infringement of

15 Mr. Eastwood’s common law right of publicity. Accordingly, Garrapata is entitled to
16 restitution of all income, profits, and other benefits resulting from Defendants’
17 conduct, in an amount to be determined according to proof at trial.
18

43.

Defendants’ actions as alleged above were malicious, oppressive, and

19 fraudulent, and done with the intent to injure Mr. Eastwood and with a willful and
20 conscious disregard for Mr. Eastwood’s rights. As a result, Garrapata is entitled to
21 recover from Defendants punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to
22 punish and deter Defendants and others from engaging in such acts in the future.
23

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

24

(False Endorsement (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)) – Garrapata Against All Defendants)

25

44.

Garrapata incorporates all prior allegations of this Complaint by this

26 reference.
27
28

45.

Garrapata is the owner of the statutory and common law rights
-11COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 12 of 17 Page ID #:12

1 associated with Mr. Eastwood’s name, image, likeness, and persona necessary for
2 endorsement deals, including Mr. Eastwood’s right to decide whether to associate
3 Mr. Eastwood’s name, image, likeness, or persona with any third party for purposes
4 relating to sponsorship and/or endorsement.
5

46.

Defendants used distinctive attributes of Mr. Eastwood’s persona, in

6 particular his name, without permission to manipulate internet searches and make it
7 appear as though Mr. Eastwood is associated with the CBD Online marketplace and
8 Defendants’ CBD products, when, in fact, he is not associated with such products.
9

47.

Defendants’ unauthorized uses constitute false or misleading

10 representations of fact to falsely imply the endorsement of Defendants’ businesses
11 and products by Mr. Eastwood.
12

48.

Defendants’ unauthorized uses of Mr. Eastwood’s persona are likely to

13 confuse and deceive consumers as to Mr. Eastwood’s sponsorship and/or
14 endorsement of the CBD Online marketplace and Defendants’ CBD products.
15 Specifically, Defendants’ use of Mr. Eastwood’s name is likely to cause consumers to
16 mistakenly believe that Mr. Eastwood is associated with the CBD Online marketplace
17 and Defendants’ CBD products, or that he sponsors or endorses the CBD Online
18 marketplace and Defendants’ products.
19

49.

As a direct and proximate result of the acts of false endorsement set

20 forth above, Garrapata has suffered actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
21

50.

Garrapata is entitled to the full range of relief available under the

22 Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117, including, without limitation, an award of actual
23 damages and the disgorgement of Defendants’ profits arising from their false or
24 misleading acts.
25

51.

Defendants’ conduct further renders this an “exceptional” case within

26 the meaning of the Lanham Act, thus entitling Garrapata to an award of attorneys’
27 fees and costs.
28

-12COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 13 of 17 Page ID #:13

1

52.

Defendants committed the unauthorized acts described above knowing

2 that they are likely to cause consumers to falsely believe that Mr. Eastwood endorses
3 Defendants’ brands and products. Defendants have thus willfully, knowingly, and
4 maliciously deceived and confused the relevant consuming public, such that
5 Garrapata is entitled to an award of treble damages.
6

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

7

(Trademark Infringement (15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)) – Garrapata Against All

8

Defendants)

9

53.

Garrapata incorporates all prior allegations of this Complaint by this

10 reference.
11

54.

Garrapata has selectively used the trademark CLINT EASTWOOD in

12 commerce in connection with products and services.
13

55.

Garrapata owns a federally registered trademark U.S. Registration No.

14 3265483 in Mr. Eastwood’s name for “Entertainment services, namely, personal
15 appearances and live performance and live recorded performances by a movie star
16 and actor” (the “Registered Mark”). A true and correct copy of Garrapata’s
17 Trademark Certificate from the United States Patent and Trademark Office is
18 attached hereto as Exhibit 3.
19

56.

The Registered Mark is a valid trademark owned by Garrapata.

20 Additionally, by virtue of Mr. Eastwood’s longstanding and continuous use of the
21 Registered Mark in commerce, Garrapata has acquired a valid common law
22 trademark in Mr. Eastwood’s name. The public has come to recognize the Registered
23 Mark as exclusively identifying Mr. Eastwood, and the mark is famous worldwide.
24

57.

Defendants infringed Garrapata’s registered and common law

25 trademarks by using the mark on the internet, to direct consumers to CBD Online,
26 which is owned and/or maintained by Defendants, and to promote the sale of CBD
27 products including Natural Stress Solutions, Farmacy Bliss, CBD Greenlab,
28

-13COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 14 of 17 Page ID #:14

1 Terahemp, Creating Better Days, and PhenoPen.

58.

2

Defendants’ unauthorized use of Garrapata’s registered and common

3 law trademarks are likely to confuse and deceive consumers as to the origin,
4 sponsorship, and/or endorsement of Defendants’ CBD brands and products.
5 Specifically, Defendants’ use of Mr. Eastwood’s name and mark is likely to cause
6 consumers to mistakenly believe that Mr. Eastwood is associated with Defendants, or
7 that he sponsors or endorses the CBD Online marketplace and Defendants’ products.

59.

8

As a direct and proximate result of the acts of trademark infringement

9 set forth above, Garrapata has suffered actual damages in an amount to be proven at
10 trial.
11

60.

Garrapata is entitled to the full range of relief available under the

12 Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117, including, without limitation, an award of actual
13 damages and the disgorgement of Defendants’ profits arising from the acts of
14 trademark infringement.
15

61.

Defendants’ conduct further renders this an “exceptional” case within

16 the meaning of the Lanham Act, thus entitling Garrapata to an award of attorneys’
17 fees and costs.
18

62.

Defendants committed the infringement described above knowing that

19 their unauthorized use of the CLINT EASTWOOD trademark is likely to cause
20 consumer confusion. Defendants have thus willfully, knowingly, and maliciously
21 deceived and confused the relevant consuming public, such that Garrapata is entitled
22 to an award of treble damages.
23

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

24

(Common Law Trademark Infringement – Garrapata Against All Defendants)

25

63.

Garrapata incorporates all prior allegations of this Complaint by this

26 reference.
27
28

64.

Garrapata owns a valid common law trademarks in CLINT
-14COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 15 of 17 Page ID #:15

1 EASTWOOD for use in connection with the promotion of products and services in
2 the entertainment industry.
3

65.

The Registered Trademark is likewise a valid trademark owned by

4 Garrapata.
5

66.

The public has come to recognize the CLINT EASTWOOD mark as

6 exclusively identifying Mr. Eastwood, and the mark is famous worldwide.
7

67.

Defendants have infringed Garrapata’s trademark by using the mark on

8 the internet to direct consumers to CBD Online, which is owned and/or maintained
9 by Defendants, and to promote the sale of CBD products including Natural Stress
10 Solutions, Farmacy Bliss, CBD Greenlab, Terahemp, Creating Better Days, and
11 PhenoPen.
12

68.

Defendants’ unauthorized use of Garrapata’s trademark is likely to

13 confuse and deceive consumers as to the origin, sponsorship, and/or endorsement of
14 Defendants’ brands and products. Specifically, Defendants’ use of Garrapata’s mark
15 is likely to cause consumers to mistakenly believe that Mr. Eastwood is associated
16 with Defendants and/or that he sponsors or endorses the CBD Online marketplace
17 and/or Defendants’ products.
18

69.

As a direct and proximate result of the acts of trademark infringement

19 set forth above, Garrapata has suffered actual damages in an amount to be proven at
20 trial.
21

70.

Defendants acted with fraud, oppression, or malice in infringing

22 Garrapata’s mark as alleged above. As such, in addition to the other relief sought
23 herein, Garrapata is entitled to an award of punitive damages.
24

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

25
26

WHEREFORE, Garrapata prays for judgment as follows:

27

1.

28

On all Claims for Relief, for an award of actual and compensatory
-15COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 16 of 17 Page ID #:16

1 damages in the millions of dollars according to proof;

2.

2

On all Claims for Relief, for the disgorgement of Defendants’ profits

3 attributable to the infringement of Garrapata’s intellectual property rights and rights
4 of publicity;

3.

5

On the First and Second Claims for Relief, for an award of punitive

6 damages in an amount sufficient to deter unlawful conduct by Defendants in the
7 future;
8

4.

On the Third and Fourth Claims for Relief, for treble damages;

9

5.

For preliminary and permanent injunctions restraining and enjoining

10 Defendants, and all persons acting in concert with them, from using Mr. Eastwood’s
11 name, images, likeness, persona, and trademarks;

6.

12

For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest according to proof and to

13 the maximum extent allowed by law;
14

7.

For attorneys’ fees and costs; and

15

8.

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

16
17
18

Dated: July 22, 2020

NOLAN HEIMANN LLP

19

By:__________________________
Jordan Susman
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Garrapata, LLC

20
21
22
23  
24
25
26
27
28

-16COMPLAINT

 Case 8:20-cv-01319 Document 1 Filed 07/22/20 Page 17 of 17 Page ID #:17

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2

Pursuant to Local Rule 38-1, Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all

3 issues so triable.
4
5

Dated: July 22, 2020

NOLAN HEIMANN LLP

6

By:__________________________
Jordan Susman
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Garrapata, LLC

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-17COMPLAINT