Court filing

Verified Complaint — Blue Acorn iCi v. Fin Cap, Inc. d/b/a Blueacorn.co (E.D.N.C. 5:21-cv-251) (E.D.N.C.)

Filed January 1, 2021 in Blueacorn Ici v. Fincap, the only filing from this case in the archive.

Record facts

Court	U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Western Division
Filed	2021-01-01

Full text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
Civil Action No. _______________________
BERINGER COMMERCE, INC. d/b/a
BLUE ACORN iCi,
Plaintiff,
v.
FIN CAP, INC. d/b/a “BLUEACORN.CO,”
BLUE ACORN PPP, LLC, BLUE OAK
FOREST, LLC, MICHAEL S. COTA,
JAMES FLORES, STEPHANIE
HOCKRIDGE REIS, and NATHAN REIS,
Defendants.
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
(Jury Trial Demanded)
NOW COMES Plaintiff BERINGER COMMERCE, INC. d/b/a BLUE ACORN iCi—an
Infosys Company, by and through undersigned counsel, and files this Verified Complaint against
Defendants BLUEACORN.CO, FIN CAP, INC., BLUE ACORN PPP, LLC, BLUE OAK
FOREST, LLC, MICHAEL S. COTA, JAMES FLORES, STEPHANIE HOCKRIDGE REIS and
NATHAN REIS (“Defendants”) as follows:
INTRODUCTION
This is a trademark infringement, copyright infringement, cybersquatting, and unfair
competition action brought by Plaintiff Blue Acorn iCi against numerous individuals and corporate
entities who are operating an infringing “Blue Acorn” business using unregistered logos, marks,
and images that are nearly identical and confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s 1) registered trademark
BLUE ACORN ICI; 2) copyright of the “Blue Acorn” logo artwork; and 3) all associated
5:21-cv-251

intellectual property rights relating to Plaintiff’s “blue acorn” brand, which has been in use in the
marketplace since 2007 in connection with Plaintiff’s goods and services.
In 2020, Defendants established a business purporting to assist small businesses and
contractors to obtain loans through the federal Paycheck Protection Act. Defendants registered
multiple websites and initiated a widespread marketing campaign using Plaintiff’s “blue acorn”
name and identical copy of Plaintiff’s acorn logo to promote their business.
In March 2021, Defendants flooded the market with their infringing “Blue Acorn” mark
and in similar channels of commerce as Plaintiff’s goods and services, causing significant, actual
consumer confusion in the marketplace. In fact, Plaintiff has been inundated with calls, complaints,
emails, messages, and investigative inquiries relating to Defendants’ business based on consumers’
mistaken belief that Plaintiff is associated with, or providing, Defendants’ business. In addition,
Defendants’ failure to provide any semblance of customer service, coupled with the serious nature
of customer complaints (such as fraud and misdirection of loan funds) are damaging the goodwill
and value associated with Plaintiff’s “blue acorn” brand.
In an attempt to address these serious issues of infringement, unfair competition, and actual
consumer confusion, Plaintiff sent two cease & desist letters outlining Defendants’ blatant
infringement and resulting losses to Plaintiff, including significant business interruption and
tarnishing of Plaintiff’s “blue acorn” brand and associated goodwill. Unfortunately, Defendants
have continued their unauthorized use and promotion of infringing marks in the face of Plaintiff’s
superior intellectual property rights, full knowledge of actual consumer confusion, and serious
harms to Plaintiff, further demonstrating that Defendants’ conduct is done willfully and with the
deliberate intent to trade on the goodwill of Plaintiff’s intellectual property rights.

Escalating consumer confusion, together with Defendants’ failure and refusal to cure their
conduct following Plaintiff’s cease & desist letters, have forced Plaintiff to file this action, seeking
damages and injunctive relief for Defendants’ intentional trademark infringement, copyright
infringement, cybersquatting, and unfair competition.
PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff BERINGER COMMERCE, INC. d/b/a BLUE ACORN iCi (“Plaintiff” or
“Blue Acorn iCi”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware
and is authorized to conduct business in the state of North Carolina, and does conduct business at
4000 Westchase Blvd #280, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607. Blue Acorn iCi is a subsidiary of
Infosys Nova Holdings, LLC, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Infosys Limited (“Infosys”).
2.
Defendant FIN CAP, INC. d/b/a “BLUEACORN.CO” (“Fin Cap”) is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Wyoming with a registered place of business
located at 5830 East 2nd Street, Suite 7000 #2435, Casper, Wyoming 82609 and a principal place
of business located at 7014 East Camelback Road, Suite 1452, Scottsdale, Arizona 85251.
3.
Defendant BLUE ACORN PPP, LLC (“Blue Acorn PPP”) is a limited liability
company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Arizona with a registered address
located at 1525 Kierland Blvd., Suite 200, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254 and a principal place of
business located at 7014 East Camelback Road, Suite 1452, Scottsdale, Arizona 85251.
4.
Defendant BLUE OAK FOREST, LLC (“Blue Oak”) is a limited liability company
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a registered address located
at 19 Kris Court, Newark, Delaware 19702 and a principal place of business located at 7014 East
Camelback Road, Suite 1452, Scottsdale, Arizona 85251.

5.
Defendant MICHAEL S. COTA (“Cota”) is an individual citizen and resident of
the State of Arizona, residing at 2138 South Valle Verde Circle, Mesa, Arizona 85209.
6.
Defendant JAMES FLORES (“Flores”) is an individual citizen and resident of the
State of Arizona, residing at 7833 East Harvard Street, Scottsdale, Arizona 85257.
7.
Defendant STEPHANIE HOCKRIDGE REIS (“S. Reis”) is an individual citizen
and resident of the State of Arizona, residing at 4747 North Scottsdale Road, C1003, Scottsdale,
Arizona 85251.
8.
Defendant NATHAN REIS (“N. Reis”) is an individual citizen and resident of the
State of Arizona, residing at 4747 North Scottsdale Road, C1003, Scottsdale, Arizona 85251.
9.
Upon information and belief, Cota, Flores, S. Reis, and N. Reis (collectively
“Individual Defendants”) established Fin Cap, Blue Acorn PPP, and Blue Oak (collectively “Entity
Defendants”), and are controlling, directing, and authorizing the activities of the Entity Defendants
as outlined in this Verified Complaint.
JURISDICTION & VENUE
10.
This Court has original federal subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§
1114, 1121, and 1125, et. seq., 17 U.S.C. § 101, et seq., and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
11.
This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the pendant state law claims pled in
this Verified Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 since the state law claims are integrally
interrelated with the federal claims and arise from a common nucleus of operative fact.
12.
As such, the administration of the state claims with the federal claims further the
interests of judicial economy in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

13.
A substantial part of the events giving rise to this action, as more fully described
below, occurred in the Eastern District of North Carolina. As such, venue is proper in this district
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
BLUE ACORN ICI
14.
Plaintiff Blue Acorn iCi is a leading digital technology consulting company that
uses analytics, digital commerce, e-commerce, customer experience, and Experience Driven
Commerce (XDC) to assist businesses with planning and developing online digital consumer
experiences for its clients.
15.
Blue Acorn iCi also offers payment processing services (processing payments for
e-commerce sales).
16.
Blue Acorn iCi offers these services through its website, located at
https://www.blueacornici.com/ and other internet channels of commerce and has developed a
distinct, identifiable, and recognized “Blue Acorn” brand to identify its unique services.
17.
Blue Acorn iCi provides services to over 169 clients throughout the United States
and generates approximately 64 million dollars in annual revenue.
18.
Blue Acorn iCi expends approximately $630,000.00 annually toward the promotion
and development of its “Blue Acorn” brand and associated services, including marketing its
services through its websites, the earliest of which was established over fifteen (15) years ago.
19.
Specifically, the domain names “blueacorn.com” (created on January 1, 2004) and
“blueacornici.com” (created on August 23, 2018) are actively maintained by Plaintiff to promote
its business and are owned by Blue Acorn iCi.

20.
Blue Acorn iCi’s business operations relating to the intellectual property at issue in
this action, including all monetary losses, business interruption, and actual consumer confusion,
have occurred and continue to occur in North Carolina.
21.
Blue Acorn iCi’s business and intellectual property rights to the “Blue Acorn”
brand were initially established by Plaintiff’s predecessors in interest, including Blue Acorn,
Inc.—a corporation formerly organized and existing under the laws of the State of South Carolina;
Blue Acorn, LLC—a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware;
Blue Acorn E-Commerce, Inc.—a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State
of Delaware; and iCiDIGITAL, LLC—a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
State of Delaware (collectively “Predecessors”).
22.
All intellectual property interests of such Predecessors in the “Blue Acorn” brand,
including all ownership rights, rights of enforcement relating to such intellectual property interests,
and Plaintiff’s IP (as defined below), have been irrevocably transferred, assigned, and conveyed
to Plaintiff. True and accurate copies of these transactions are attached as Exhibit A and are
incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.
23.
In October 2020, Blue Acorn iCi was acquired by Infosys Nova Holdings, LLC—
a wholly owned subsidiary of Infosys. However, Blue Acorn iCi has retained ownership and
enforcement rights relating to the “Blue Acorn” intellectual property at issue in this lawsuit.
24.
As such, Plaintiff has the sole and exclusive legal, contractual, and statutory right
to bring this action to enforce its intellectual property rights and enjoin Defendants’ trademark
infringement, copyright infringement, and unfair competition.

PLAINTIFF’S BLUE ACORN BRAND
25.
The “Blue Acorn” brand built by Blue Acorn iCi has been promoted in public
channels of trade since 2007 (“Blue Acorn Brand”). True and accurate copies of marketing
materials depicting the Blue Acorn Brand from 2007 to the present are attached as Exhibit B.
26.
The Blue Acorn Brand has been continuously used by Plaintiff for over fourteen
(14) years to promote its business. The following representative excerpts from the materials
contained in Exhibit B demonstrate the consistent use and evolution of the Blue Acorn Brand over
the years:
Blue Acorn Brand 2007 - 2009

Blue Acorn Brand 2009 - 2015

Blue Acorn Brand 2015 – Present

Blue Acorn Brand 2019 - Present

See Exhibit B.
27.
While the Blue Acorn Brand has undergone minor stylistic modifications and
modernization throughout the years, the core and distinctive elements of the mark—the left-tilted

acorn, the font style and capitalization, the typeface contrast between the words “blue” and
“acorn,” and the unvaried use of the color blue—have remained the same.
28.
Plaintiff is the sole owner, developer, and lawful user of the Blue Acorn Brand,
which has been continuously and exclusively used, promoted, and developed by Plaintiff and its
Predecessors since 2007 in connection with Plaintiff’s services.
29.
Plaintiff’s longstanding, original, and prior use and development of the Blue Acorn
Brand confers protectable and superior intellectual property rights in and to the Blue Acorn Brand
under federal and state law, including the common laws of North Carolina.
PLAINTIFF’S BLUE ACORN ICI TRADEMARK
30.
In addition to the Blue Acorn Brand, Plaintiff is also the sole owner of valid and
subsisting United States Registration No. 6,272,484 on the Principal Register for the word mark
“BLUE ACORN ICI” (“BLUE ACORN ICI Mark”). A true and accurate printout of the
registration certificate issued for the BLUE ACORN ICI Mark, including a list of the goods and
services covered, is contained in the materials attached as Exhibit C and is incorporated as if fully
stated in this Verified Complaint.
31.
Blue Acorn iCi’s trademark registration for BLUE ACORN ICI covers, inter alia,
“[a]ssistance, advisory services and consultancy with regard to business planning [and] business
management.” See Exhibit C.
32.
The BLUE ACORN ICI Mark is a valid, subsisting, unrevoked, and uncancelled
trademark under federal and state law, including the common laws of North Carolina.
33.
On July 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed a trademark application with the United States
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for the BLUE ACORN ICI Mark. A true and accurate

printout of the USPTO wrapper is contained in the materials attached as Exhibit C and is
incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.
34.
The USPTO serial number for the application is 90/057,631.
35.
The owner-applicant is Plaintiff.
36.
There was no opposition to registration of the BLUE ACORN ICI Mark.
37.
Accordingly, the BLUE ACORN ICI Mark was registered by the USPTO on
February 16, 2021 under registration number 6,272,484.
PLAINTIFF’S BLUE ACORN LOGO
38.
One of Plaintiff’s Predecessors, Blue Acorn E-Commerce, Inc., independently
created the following blue acorn image or artwork (“Acorn Logo”) in connection with the Blue
Acorn Brand.

39.
Since 2009, the Acorn Logo has remained substantially unchanged and has been
continuously and exclusively used, promoted, and developed by Plaintiff and its Predecessors in
connection with Plaintiff’s services.
40.
The Acorn Logo was not copied from any other work, but was designed and drawn
by Plaintiff, through its Predecessors.
41.
Pursuant to an assignment contained in the attached Exhibit A, Blue Acorn, LLC
assigned and conveyed all right and title to the Acorn Logo to Plaintiff.

42.
The Acorn Logo is wholly original, and Plaintiff is the exclusive owner of all right,
title, and interest, including all rights under copyright, in the Acorn Logo.
43.
On May 7, 2021, Plaintiff delivered the deposit, application, and fee required for
copyright registration of the Acorn Logo with the United States Copyright Office (“USCO”) in the
proper form. On May 11, 2021, the USCO made a first refusal of the application. True and accurate
copies of these documents are contained in the materials attached as Exhibit C and are
incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.
44.
Contemporaneously with this Verified Complaint, Plaintiff filed a Request for
Reconsideration and a Notice of Litigation along with a copy of this Verified Complaint, which is
now pending before the USCO. True and accurate copies of these documents are contained in the
materials attached as Exhibit C and are incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.
45.
Plaintiff believes the Request for Reconsideration will be granted and will result in
registration of its copyright for the Acorn Logo.
46.
As such, Plaintiff is the owner of valid and subsisting copyright for the Acorn Logo.
47.
Plaintiff’s copyright, as well as the longstanding, original, and prior use and
development of the Acorn Logo, confers protectable and superior intellectual property rights in
and to the Acorn Logo under federal and state law, including the common laws of North Carolina.
PLAINTIFF’S BRAND VALUE AND GOODWILL
48.
Since 2007, Plaintiff has established a valuable reputation and goodwill in its Blue
Acorn Brand, BLUE ACORN ICI Mark, and Acorn Logo (collectively, “Plaintiff’s IP”).
49.
As further demonstrated by Exhibits A through C, Plaintiff has invested
significant time, effort, and financial resources developing and marketing Plaintiff’s IP to identify
and promote its business and goodwill among businesses and consumers.

50.
Plaintiff’s IP is distinctive to the consuming public and Plaintiff’s trade.
51.
Since 2007, Plaintiff has promoted and sold its web-based services to the public
and has earned a reputation of providing high quality e-commerce and customer experience
services, the delivery of promised results, and excellent customer service and response.
52.
As a result of Plaintiff’s expenditures, efforts, and long-standing brand
development, Plaintiff’s IP has come to signify the high quality of Plaintiff’s services and has
acquired incalculable distinction, reputation, and goodwill belonging exclusively to Plaintiff.
Documents evidencing Plaintiff’s brand recognition and quality of services, including publications
and awards, are attached collectively as Exhibit D and incorporated as if fully stated in this
Verified Complaint.
53.
Plaintiff has not authorized any other person or entity to use, publish, reproduce,
copy, or possess Plaintiff’s IP.
DEFENDANTS’ BLUE ACORN BUSINESS
54.
On October 12, 2020, Defendant Fin Cap filed Articles of Incorporation with the
Wyoming Secretary of State. A true and accurate printout of the Articles of Incorporation is
contained in the attached Exhibit E, which is incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified
Complaint.
55.
On March 24, 2021, Defendant Fin Cap registered the trade name “Blueacorn.co”
with the Wyoming Secretary of State. A true and accurate printout of the trade name application
is contained in the attached Exhibit E.
56.
Fin Cap identified the business of “blueacorn.co” as “software.”

57.
Despite the March 2021 registration of “Blueacorn.co” in Wyoming, publicly
available records indicate that one or more Defendants began operated a web-based business under
the trade name and through the domain “blueacorn.co” as early as May 2020.
58.
Specifically, Defendants’ “Blue Acorn” business purports to assist businesses,
independent contractors, and self-employed individuals in applying for funds through the federal
Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) through the use of online digital services.
59.
Upon information and belief, Defendants are obtaining bank account information
from consumers and are directing and/or assisting in the navigation of federal PPP funds to private
bank accounts.
60.
In and around March 2021, Defendants web-based business expanded to operations
using the trade names “Blue Acorn,” “Blue Acorn PPP,” and “Blue PPP.”
61.
On April 16, 2021, Defendant Blue Acorn PPP was also established by one or more
Defendants to promote and operate the PPP business in connection with “blueacorn.co” and the
trade names referenced in the previous paragraph. A true and accurate copy of Blue Acorn PPP’s
Articles of Incorporation is contained in the attached Exhibit E.
62.
Defendants are currently operating their PPP-related “Blue Acorn” business
through several websites, including the following:
https://blueacorn.co/
https://blueppp.net/
https://blueppp.com/
https://ppp.businesswarrior.com/
https://getblueacorn.com/
https://howndppp.com/

63.
Each of these websites invite the customer to take a “quiz” to see if they are eligible
for PPP funds and to “find out how much you can get.”
64.
The quiz then asks the customer several questions about their earnings and then
requires an email address to proceed. Ultimately, customers are directed to Defendants for further
solicitation and sale of their services.
65.
Upon information and belief, customers located in the state of North Carolina have
taken the “quiz” located on Defendants’ websites.
66.
In addition, Defendants have recently launched a widespread, nationwide
advertising campaign to promote their PPP-related “Blue Acorn” business.
67.
Specifically, Defendants are advertising heavily on social media websites and other
web-based platforms, such as Google, Tik Tok, LinkedIn, Facebook, and YouTube.
68.
Defendants’ business, marketing, and advertising is targeted to individuals and
entities nationwide, including customers and businesses located in North Carolina.
69.
Defendants are also advertising heavily on numerous media platforms such as
radio, podcasts, and other marketing platforms to promote their business, through
which Defendants have purchased and/or promoted advertising specifically targeted to customers
in North Carolina.
70.
Despite Defendants’ use of multiple trade names and the websites to market their
new business, each of the trade names and websites identified in this Verified Complaint have one
fundamental element in common—they all use the following name and logo (“Infringing Mark”)
to promote Defendants’ PPP business:

71.
True and accurate printouts from Defendants’ advertisements and websites
showing Defendants’ pervasive use of the Infringing Mark are attached collectively as Exhibit G
and are incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.
72.
At the time Defendants used the Infringing Mark in their marketing, which upon
information and belief dates back to at least May 2020, Plaintiff’s IP had already been in
widespread use by Plaintiff since 2007.
73.
Side-by-side comparison shows that the Infringing Mark is unmistakably and
nearly identical to Plaintiff’s IP.
Defendants’ Infringing Mark

Plaintiff’s Mark

74.
Both images depicted have the same use of blue coloring, the same font style, the
same lack of capitalization, the same font contrast between the “blue” and the “acorn,” and the
same emphasis or bold typeface of the word “acorn.”
75.
The striking similarity is not accidental or coincidental.
76.
Defendants’ adoption and use of a logo that is confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s IP
is apparent and intentional.
77.
Defendants have used the confusingly similar logo in the state of North Carolina.
78.
Defendants’ intentional infringement is further confirmed by Defendants’ blatant
use of an exact replica of Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo to promote Defendants’ PPP business.
79.
For example, the following video advertisement depicted in the screenshot below
was posted by Defendants to YouTube.com, which was and is available and accessible in North
Carolina, and is accessible at the following URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5WEOeqCH48 (last accessed on June 7, 2021).
80.
All hyperlinks embedded in the YouTube advertisement navigate the user to one of
Defendants’ numerous websites, through which Defendants market their PPP service.
81.
On closer inspection, Defendants’ use of Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo is unmistakable:

See Exhibit G.
82.
Side-by-side comparison of Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo and Defendants’ blue acorn
logo confirms that the latter is an identical copy of the former:

Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo

Defendants’ acorn logo

See Exhibit G.
83.
At all times relevant to Defendants’ use and publication of the replica blue acorn
logo in their marketing, Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo had already been in widespread use by Plaintiff
since 2009.
84.
Given the striking similarity between Infringing Mark and Plaintiff’s IP, as well as
the confluence in the channels of trade by both parties which are rooted in web-based or internet
services, the likelihood of immediate and ongoing consumer confusion is apparent.
ACTUAL CONSUMER CONFUSION
85.
Defendants’ operation of the PPP-related “Blue Acorn” business, using the
confusingly similar Infringing Mark and replica of Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo, has in fact confused
and deceived consumers into believing, mistakenly, that Defendants’ PPP services originate from
Plaintiff or are otherwise affiliated or authorized by Plaintiff.
86.
Specifically, and as a direct result of Defendants’ infringement and copying of
Plaintiff’s IP in their recent media campaign, Blue Acorn iCi began receiving a large number of
calls, website contacts, emails, social media communications, and mail intended for Defendants’
PPP-related “Blue Acorn” business. True and accurate copies of communications received by
Plaintiff, as well as Plaintiff’s telephone logs and website activity, showing customer contacts

relating to Defendants’ activities, are filed separately as Proposed Sealed Exhibit F and are
incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.1
87.
The majority of these communications are from irate customers who are deeply
unhappy with the PPP services Defendants purport to provide.
88.
As further demonstrated in the materials filed as Proposed Sealed Exhibit F to this
Verified Complaint, multiple residents of North Carolina are among Defendants’ customers who
have contracted for Defendants’ services and have serious complaints about those services, which
were provided in the state of North Carolina.
89.
While the initial number of misdirected communications was handled internally by
Plaintiff, the volume and serious nature of the consumer complaints quickly escalated and have
become entirely unmanageable.
90.
The number and volume of communications to Plaintiff’s Raleigh, North Carolina
office are overwhelming Plaintiff’s employees throughout the day. See Exhibit F.
91.
Plaintiff’s website contacts are also overwhelmed by Defendants’ “Blue Acorn”
PPP customers. For example, Plaintiff’s website contains a “contact us” page allowing customers
to send an electronic message to Plaintiff through the website. As of June 7, 2021, 451 of the total
519 contacts were related to Defendants’ business—or an astounding 86.9% percent of the total
contacts. See Exhibit F.
92.
In addition, Plaintiff’s employees have been individually contacted by Defendants’
customers through their own personal social media platforms, including direct messages sent

1Contemporaneously with the filing of this Verified Complaint, Plaintiff has sought leave to file Exhibits F, J, L, and
N under seal to protect sensitive financial information of non-party consumers who submitted complaints about
Defendants’ business.

through Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. To date a total of 134 social media engagements have
been initiated by Defendants’ customers.
93.
Unfortunately, due to Defendants’ unauthorized use of Plaintiff’s IP, these
consumers believe Plaintiff Blue Acorn iCi is to blame for Defendants’ activities.
94.
Plaintiff’s ongoing receipt of consumer communications and complaints intended
for Defendants constitute proof of actual confusion. See Exhibit F.
95.
Actual consumer confusion has increased at an alarmingly high rate due to the
recent surge of online and multimedia marketing initiated by Defendants to promote their PPP
business.
96.
For example, as of May 28, 2021, Defendants’ YouTube video shown above had
been viewed over 14 million times in a little over one month. Exhibit G.
97.
This staggering number of views of the YouTube advertisement, in which
Defendants use an obvious copy of Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo, will only continue to increase unless
Defendants’ infringement is enjoined.
98.
In addition, Defendants have invested heavily in online advertising to ensure that
any search for a “blue acorn” business leads the searcher to one if its infringing websites.
99.
For example, a Google search for “blue acorn” produces one of Defendants’
infringing websites (https://blueacorn.co) as the first result.

*Search conducted May 28, 2021.
100.
The first and second results that follow are Plaintiff’s website and then another of
Defendants’ infringing websites:

101.
Because Defendants’ name and logo is confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s IP,
consumers easily mistake Plaintiff’s website for that of Defendants and vice versa.
102.
This consumer confusion is causing significant, irreparable, and unmitigated harm
to Plaintiff’s IP, business, goodwill, and reputation in the marketplace.
103.
In addition to receiving direct complaints from consumers, an increasing number
of complaints about Defendants have been posted on various social media platforms and submitted
to consumer watchdog organizations and governmental agencies—all based on consumers’
mistaken belief that Plaintiff Blue Acorn iCi is the provider of services related to Defendants’ PPP
business.

104.
True and accurate copies of these consumer complaints are attached collectively as
Exhibit H and are incorporated as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.
105.
Again, consumers believe Blue Acorn iCi is to blame.
106.
By way of example, the following consumer complaint submitted to Plaintiff Blue
Acorn iCi referencing a complaint filed with the Better Business Bureau (BBB) demonstrates the
typical degree of customer dissatisfaction erroneously attributed to Blue Acorn iCi:
My name is [WITHHELD]. This correspondence is in regard to my
PPP loan. My SBA loan number is [WITHHELD] and my number
with [WITHHELD ACCOUNT NUMBER]. On April 7, 2021, your
company attempted to deposit my PPP funds in my account which
total [WITHHELD] dollars due to not having my complete account
number. I have called the company over 25 times to give the
company the correct banking account. I have emailed Blueacorn
over 15 times in the last two weeks. I finally had to file a complaint
with the Better Business Bureau and with the SBA because I cannot
get in touch with anything to assist me. . . . I would just like to be
contacted.

Exhibit F (personal and financial information withheld subject to Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal filed
contemporaneously with this Verified Complaint).
107.
As demonstrated by Exhibits F and H, which contain numerous communications
similar to the above, the harm associated with consumers’ actual confusion about the source of
Defendants’ goods and services is substantial and undeniable.
108.
Defendants’ total lack of customer service and failure to deliver the product and
service they purport to provide amplifies the harm caused by this evident consumer confusion.
109.
Over the past few months, Plaintiff has expended significant time and resources in
an attempt to address this cascade of complaints and misdirected communications with consumers
directly by explaining that Blue Acorn iCi has no connection or association whatsoever with
Defendants’ “Blue Acorn” PPP business that is the source of consumers’ ire and dissatisfaction.

110.
Attempting to address these communications and complaints directly with
consumers is extremely costly, time-consuming, and burdensome for Plaintiff. These events have
also led to significant interruption in Plaintiff’s business, and ultimately, have not been effective
as many customers are desperate and continue to contact Plaintiff even after they have been
advised that Plaintiff has nothing to do with Defendants’ PPP business.
111.
In addition, Plaintiff had been forced to retain counsel to respond to formal inquiries
from the State of Tennessee Division of Consumer Affairs and Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Grand Jury Subpoena to explain that Plaintiff has no connection with the “Blue Acorn PPP”
business under investigation by these agencies. See Exhibit F.
112.
Unfortunately, Defendants’ pattern of failing to respond to customers and failure to
maintain a monitored email address and/or dedicated customer service line for customer concerns
and communications has only exacerbated the harm caused by consumer confusion.
113.
Additionally, Defendants’ increased marketing and associated unlawful use and
infringement of Plaintiff’s IP has only increased, rendering Plaintiff’s direct, case-by-case
approach untenable and insufficient to address the harm caused by Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S CEASE & DESIST LETTERS
114.
On April 8, 2021, Plaintiff sent a certified letter to Defendants, advising them of
Plaintiff’s rightful ownership of Plaintiff’s IP and Defendants’ unlawful use of the Infringing Mark
and acorn logo that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo. A true and accurate copy of the April 8,
2021 Cease & Desist letter is attached as Exhibit I and is incorporated as if fully stated in this
Verified Complaint. A true and accurate copy of consumer complaints submitted with the April 8,
2021 Cease & Desist Letter was filed separately as Proposed Sealed Exhibit J and is incorporated
as if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.

115.
Defendants did not respond to the letter in any manner and failed to take any of the
actions outlined in the April 8, 2021 Cease & Desist letter.
116.
Plaintiff and undersigned counsel also attempted on multiple occasions in April and
May 2021 to communicate with Defendants through the contact information published by
Defendants on their websites and marketing materials, but were unable to make any contact with
them.
117.
Counsel for Plaintiff sent two letters to Defendant regarding consumer complaints
and information received by Plaintiff related to Defendants’ business, on May 12 and May 17,
2021. A true and accurate copy of the May 12, 2021 Letter to Defendant Fin Cap is attached as
Exhibit K; a true and accurate copy of consumer complaints submitted with the May 12, 2021
Letter to Defendant Fin Cap is filed separately as Proposed Sealed Exhibit L; a true and accurate
copy of the May 17, 2021 Letter to Defendant Fin Cap is attached as Exhibit M; and a true and
accurate copy of consumer complaints submitted with the May 17, 2021 Letter to Defendant Fin
Cap is filed separately as Proposed Sealed Exhibit M, all of which are incorporated as if fully
stated in this Verified Complaint.
118.
However, hoping to avoid the necessity of legal action, Plaintiff sent a second Cease
& Desist letter to Defendants on May 26, 2021, addressing their persisted failure to respond and
failure to cease infringement activity and address the evident consumer confusion. A true and
accurate copy of the second Cease & Desist letter is attached as Exhibit O and is incorporated as
if fully stated in this Verified Complaint.
119.
In the second Cease & Desist letter, Plaintiff specifically requested that Defendants’
take the following actions:

1) Cease, desist, and permanently refrain from all use of “blue acorn” or
“blueacorn,” or any confusingly similar name or mark, including but not limited
to deactivating the “blueacorn.co” website and any other website associated
with your business in which any form of the name “blue acorn” is used; change
your company name(s) with the Wyoming and Arizona Secretaries of State; and
inform your customers of the new name;

2) Destroy all promotional materials bearing the infringing “blue acorn” name,
logo, images, acorn image, and trademarks;

3) Place a prominent disclaimer on the blueacorn.co website, and any other
website associated with your business, explaining that the website is not
affiliated with, sponsored by, or otherwise connected to Blue Acorn iCi;

4) If you have not already done so, set up a monitored email address and/or
dedicated customer service line for customer inquiries; and

5) Remove any acorn images from your marketing materials, including but not
limited to the acorn drawing that appears in the tab for blueacorn.co when the
site is accessed through Google Chrome.

See Exhibit O.
120.
Defendants were provided until June 1, 2021 to confirm their compliance with these
actions and cessation of infringing activity.
121.
As of June 1, 2021, Defendants failed to take all actions requested.
122.
While an attorney for one of the Defendants contacted the undersigned, Defendants
were unwilling to cease infringing activity and offered no alternative solution to address the
ongoing confusion and damages to Plaintiff.
123.
Defendants’ continued and unlawful use of Plaintiff’s IP after receiving notice
through the first and second Cease & Desist letters of Plaintiff’s rights in such IP, demonstrates
that Defendants’ conduct is willful and intentional and must be enjoined.
124.
In addition, in the weeks leading up to the filing of this action, consumer complaints
have escalated to very serious claims of fraud.

125.
On May 5, 2021, two customers contacted Blue Acorn iCi (again erroneously
believing it was the Defendants) and indicated that their PPP loans were rerouted to a bank account
that was not their own.
126.
A similar posting on YouTube, referencing Defendants’ YouTube video (the one
using Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo) identifies Defendants’ business as a “SCAM” and cautions
consumers: “Don’t give your info!”

Exhibit H; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwRfChlfDXE
127.
Additional complaints to the Better Business Bureau and other private and public
governing bodies, among others, are contained in Exhibit H and incorporated as if fully stated in
this Verified Complaint.
128.
Plaintiff has also received formal communications from state governing bodies,
including the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of Tennessee Division of Consumer
Affairs seeking information apparently related to potential criminal activity, civil fraud and/or
wrongful business practices relating to Defendants’ PPP business. See Exhibit F.

129.
Once again, Plaintiff has been forced to retain legal counsel to communicate with
these State agencies to explain that it has no connection whatsoever to Defendants’ business.
130.
The increase in Defendants’ nationwide advertising, together with the increasing
frequency and serious nature of consumers’ complaints, has forced Plaintiff to file this action to
protect its business from further monetary and reputational loss and to enjoin Defendants’
infringing use of Plaintiff’s IP.
COUNT I
FEDERAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT – LANHAM ACT
15 U.S.C. § 1114

131.
All prior allegations contained in this Verified Complaint are pled as if fully set
forth in this paragraph.
132.
Plaintiff is the sole and true owner of Plaintiff’s IP.
133.
Plaintiff has valid, enforceable, and protectable intellectual property rights in
Plaintiff’s IP and has a superior right in and to Plaintiff’s IP.
134.
Plaintiff’s IP, including all unregistered trademarks, are used by Plaintiff
throughout the United States and are known by consumers throughout the United States.
135.
Plaintiff’s IP is distinctive and is not descriptive.
136.
Defendants are using and promoting their business in similar channels of trade as
Plaintiff and are using, publishing and promoting the Infringing Mark in connection with their
business.
137.
Defendants’ use and promotion of the Infringing Mark is confusingly similar to
Plaintiff’s IP and is, in fact, confusing and deceiving the consuming public.
138.
Defendants’ use and promotion of an acorn logo that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn
Logo to promote its services is, in fact, confusing and deceiving the consuming public.

139.
Defendants have actual and constructive knowledge of Plaintiff’s superior right of
ownership and use in commerce of Plaintiff’s IP prior to Defendants’ use and promotion of the
Infringing Mark and replica acorn logo.
140.
Defendants’ use and promotion of the Infringing Mark and acorn logo that is
identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo is unauthorized.
141.
Defendants’ use and promotion in commerce of the Infringing Mark and acorn logo
that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo is causing, and unless restrained, is highly likely to
continue to cause, consumer confusion, mistake, and deception about the origin, source,
sponsorship, or affiliation of Defendants’ PPP services and is causing consumers to believe,
contrary to fact, that Defendants’ services are sold, authorized, endorsed, or sponsored by Plaintiff,
or that Defendants are in some way affiliated with or sponsored by Plaintiff.
142.
Defendants’ unauthorized use constitutes trademark infringement in violation of
The Lanham Act, Pub. L. No. 79-489, 60 Stat. 427, 15 U.S.C. § 1114, et. seq.
143.
Defendants have continued their unauthorized use and promotion as alleged after
receiving Plaintiff’s Cease & Desist letters, further demonstrating their willful and intentional
infringement.
144.
Defendants’ acts are done willfully and with the deliberate intent to trade on the
goodwill of Plaintiff’s IP and cause confusion and deception in the marketplace.
145.
As such, Defendants’ conduct and unauthorized use constitutes a knowing,
intentional, and willful violation of Plaintiff’s rights, rendering this an exceptional case under 15
U.S.C. § 1117(a).

146.
As a result of Defendants’ infringement, Plaintiff has suffered monetary damages
and business loss, in addition to the continuing and substantial damage to the goodwill and
reputation established by Plaintiff in its IP.
147.
This continuing loss of goodwill and business reputation cannot be properly
calculated and constitutes irreparable harm and an injury for which Plaintiff has no adequate
remedy at law.
148.
Plaintiff is suffering, and will continue to suffer, damage and irreparable harm
unless this Court enjoins Defendants’ conduct.
149.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to, among other relief, injunctive relief and an
award of actual damages, Defendants’ profits, enhanced damages and profits, reasonable
attorneys’ fees, and costs of the action under Sections 34 and 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§
1116, 1117, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest.
COUNT II
FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION – LANHAM ACT
15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)

150.
All prior allegations contained in this Verified Complaint are pled as if fully set
forth in this paragraph.
151.
Defendants’ use and promotion in commerce of the Infringing Mark and acorn logo
that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo is causing, and unless restrained, is highly likely to
continue to cause, consumer confusion, mistake, and deception about the origin, source,
sponsorship, or affiliation of Defendants’ PPP services and is causing consumers to believe,
contrary to fact, that Defendants’ services are sold, authorized, endorsed, or sponsored by Plaintiff,
or that Defendants are in some way affiliated with or sponsored by Plaintiff.

152.
Defendants’ unauthorized use in commerce of the Infringing Mark and acorn logo
that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo constitutes use of a false designation of origin and
misleading description and representation of fact.
153.
Defendants’ conduct is willful and is intended to cause, and is in fact causing, actual
confusion, mistake, and deception as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Defendants
with Plaintiff.
154.
Defendants’ conduct constitutes unfair competition in violation of The Lanham
Act, Pub. L. No. 79-489, 60 Stat. 427, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), et. seq.
155.
As a result of Defendants’ unfair competition, Plaintiff has suffered monetary
damages and business loss, in addition to the continuing and substantial damage to the goodwill
and reputation established by Plaintiff in its IP.
156.
This continuing loss of goodwill and business reputation cannot be properly
calculated and constitutes irreparable harm and an injury for which Plaintiff has no adequate
remedy at law.
157.
Plaintiff is suffering, and will continue to suffer, damage and irreparable harm
unless this Court enjoins Defendants’ conduct.
158.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to, among other relief, injunctive relief and an
award of actual damages, Defendants’ profits, enhanced damages and profits, reasonable
attorneys’ fees, and costs of the action under Sections 34 and 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§
1116, 1117, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest.

COUNT III
CYBERSQUATTING
15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)

159.
All prior allegations contained in the Verified Complaint are pled as if fully set
forth in this paragraph.
160.
Plaintiff owns all rights in and to Plaintiff’s IP and domain names “blueacorn.com”
and “blueacornici.com,” which were strong and distinctive as of the date Defendants registered the
domain names “blueacorn.co” and “getblueacorn.com” (collectively “Domain Names”).
161.
Upon information and belief, Defendants registered and used the Domain Names,
which are confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s IP and domain names “blueacorn.com” and
“blueacornici.com.”
162.
Defendants registered and used the Domain Names with an intent to profit from
their confusing similarity to Plaintiff’s IP and domain names “blueacorn.com” and
“blueacornici.com.”
163.
Upon information and belief, Defendants registered the Domain Names:
i. despite knowing Defendants had no rights in any “blue acorn” name and was
not known by any name that was referenced or reflected in the Domain Names;

ii. without having any bona fide, non-infringing, commercial use or fair non-
commercial use of the Domain Names; and

iii. with the intent to divert consumers looking for Plaintiff’s services online to
Defendants’ website by exploiting the confusing similarity of the Domain
Names and Plaintiff’s IP for Defendants’ commercial gain.

164.
Defendants’ registration and use of the Domain Names to promote its PPP business
constitutes trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

165.
Defendants’ conduct is willful and is intended to cause, and is in fact causing, actual
confusion, mistake, and deception as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Defendants
with Plaintiff.
166.
Defendants’ conduct constitutes cybersquatting in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d).
167.
As a result of Defendants’ cybersquatting, Plaintiff has suffered monetary damages
and business loss, in addition to the continuing and substantial damage to the goodwill and
reputation established by Plaintiff in its IP.
168.
This continuing loss of goodwill and business reputation cannot be properly
calculated and constitutes irreparable harm and an injury for which Plaintiff has no adequate
remedy at law.
169.
Plaintiff is suffering, and will continue to suffer, damage and irreparable harm
unless this Court enjoins Defendants’ conduct.
170.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to, among other relief, injunctive relief and an
award of actual damages, Defendants’ profits, enhanced damages and profits, reasonable
attorneys’ fees, and costs of the action under Sections 34 and 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§
1116 and 1125(d), together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest.
COUNT IV
FEDERAL COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
15 U.S.C. § 101

171.
All prior allegations contained in this Verified Complaint are pled as if fully set
forth in this paragraph.
172.
The Acorn Logo is an original visual work of art containing copyrightable subject
matter for which copyright protection exists under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, as
amended, 17 U.S.C. § 101, et seq.

173.
Plaintiff has filed a copyright application with the USCO, and received a first
refusal, and is filing a Request for Reconsideration and a Notice of Litigation (along with a copy
of this Verified Complaint) with the USCO contemporaneously with this Verified Complaint,
thereby providing a right to sue under 17 U.S. §411(a). See Exhibit C.
174.
Plaintiff is the sole and true copyright owner of the Acorn Logo.
175.
Plaintiff (or its Predecessors) have created, published, promoted, and used the
Acorn Logo in connection with its business since 2009.
176.
The value of the Acorn Logo to Plaintiff is substantial because, inter alia: 1) the
quality of Plaintiff’s business, brand, and services are identified by and through the Acorn Logo;
2) the Acorn Logo has been used in commerce for over a decade in connection with its services;
3) the Acorn Logo identifies the goodwill and business reputation of Plaintiff and its services; and
3) the Acorn Logo is distinctive in shape, design and color.
177.
Defendants are using, reproducing, and publishing an identical copy of the Acorn
Logo in their promotional materials.
178.
Defendants’ blue acorn image is indistinguishable from the Acorn Logo.
179.
Defendants’ use, publication, and reproduction of an identical image as the Acorn
Logo in their marketing and advertisements is unauthorized.
180.
Defendants have never accounted to Plaintiff or otherwise paid Plaintiff for use of
the Acorn Logo.
181.
Plaintiff has knowledge that Defendants copied the Acorn Logo because the blue
acorn image used by Defendants is identical to the Acorn Logo and cannot possibly be explained
other than as a result of copying.

182.
Defendants have actual and constructive knowledge of Plaintiff’s superior right of
ownership and use in commerce of the Acorn Logo before they copied the Acorn Logo.
183.
Defendants’ unauthorized use of a replica Acorn Logo constitutes direct
infringement of Plaintiff's exclusive rights in the Acorn Logo in violation of Section 501 of
the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 501.
184.
Defendants have continued their unauthorized use and reproduction of the Acorn
Logo as alleged after receiving Plaintiff’s Cease & Desist letter, further demonstrating their willful
and intentional infringement.
185.
Defendants’ acts are done willfully and with the deliberate intent to trade on the
goodwill and value of Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo.
186.
On information and belief, Defendants’ willful and intentional copyright
infringement has enabled Defendants to obtain profit illegally from their use and reproduction.
187.
In addition, Defendants’ use, publication, and promotion of a replica Acorn Logo
is causing consumers to be confused about the origin, source, sponsorship, or affiliation of
Defendants’ PPP services and is causing consumers to believe, contrary to fact, that Defendants’
services are sold, authorized, endorsed, or sponsored by Plaintiff, or that Defendants are in some
way affiliated with or sponsored by Plaintiff.
188.
As a result of Defendants’ copyright infringement, Plaintiff has suffered monetary
damages and business loss, in addition to the continuing and substantial damage to the goodwill
and reputation established by Plaintiff.
189.
This continuing loss of goodwill and business reputation cannot be properly
calculated and constitutes irreparable harm and an injury for which Plaintiff has no adequate
remedy at law.

190.
Plaintiff is suffering, and will continue to suffer, damage and irreparable harm
unless this Court enjoins Defendants’ conduct.
191.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to, among other relief, injunctive relief and an
award of actual damages, Defendants’ profits, enhanced damages and profits, statutory damages,
reasonable attorneys’ fees, and costs of the action under 17 U.S.C. § 101, et. seq., 17 U.S.C. § 501,
17 U.S.C. § 505, 17 U.S.C. § 504, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest.
COUNT V
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
N.C. GEN. STAT. § 80-11 AND COMMON LAW

192.
All prior allegations contained in the Verified Complaint are pled as if fully set
forth in this paragraph.
193.
Plaintiff is the sole and true owner of Plaintiff’s IP.
194.
Plaintiff has valid, enforceable, and protectable intellectual property rights in
Plaintiff’s IP and has a superior right in and to the IP.
195.
Plaintiff has used, promoted, and published Plaintiff’s IP in North Carolina and has
customers throughout North Carolina.
196.
Plaintiff’s IP is distinctive and is not descriptive.
197.
Defendants are using and promoting their business in similar channels of trade as
Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, the same channels of trade located in the state of North
Carolina.
198.
Defendants have and continue to use the Infringing Mark in the state of North
Carolina.

199.
Defendants’ use and promotion of the Infringing Mark is confusingly similar to
Plaintiff’s IP and is, in fact, confusing and deceiving the consuming public, including but not
limited to, members of the consuming public located in the state of North Carolina.
200.
Defendants’ use and promotion of an acorn logo that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn
Logo to promote its services is, in fact, confusing and deceiving the consuming public, including
but not limited to, members of the consuming public located in the state of North Carolina.
201.
Defendants have actual and constructive knowledge of Plaintiff’s superior right of
ownership and use in commerce of Plaintiff’s IP prior to Defendants’ use and promotion of the
Infringing Mark and replica acorn logo.
202.
Defendants’ use and promotion of the Infringing Mark and acorn logo that is
identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo is unauthorized.
203.
Defendants’ use and promotion in commerce of the Infringing Mark and acorn logo
that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo is causing, and unless restrained, is highly likely to
continue to cause, consumer confusion, mistake, and deception about the origin, source,
sponsorship, or affiliation of Defendants’ PPP services and is causing consumers to believe,
contrary to fact, that Defendants’ services are sold, authorized, endorsed, or sponsored by Plaintiff,
or that Defendants are in some way affiliated with or sponsored by Plaintiff.
204.
Defendants’ unauthorized use constitutes trademark infringement in violation of
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 80-11 et. seq. and the common law of the State of North Carolina.
205.
Defendants have continued their unauthorized use and promotion after receiving
Plaintiff’s Cease & Desist letter, further demonstrating their willful and intentional infringement.
206.
Defendants’ acts are done willfully and with the deliberate intent to trade on the
goodwill of Plaintiff’s IP and cause confusion and deception in the marketplace.

207.
As such, Defendants’ conduct and unauthorized use constitutes a knowing,
intentional, and willful violation of Plaintiff’s rights.
208.
As a result of Defendants’ infringement, Plaintiff has suffered monetary damages
and business loss, in addition to the continuing and substantial damage to the goodwill and
reputation established by Plaintiff in its IP.
209.
This continuing loss of goodwill and business reputation cannot be properly
calculated and constitutes irreparable harm and an injury for which Plaintiff has no adequate
remedy at law.
210.
Plaintiff is suffering, and will continue to suffer, damage and irreparable harm
unless this Court enjoins Defendants’ conduct.
211.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to, among other relief, injunctive relief and an
award of actual damages, enhanced damages and profits, reasonable attorneys’ fees, and costs of
the action as provided by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 80-12, et. seq., together with prejudgment and post-
judgment interest.
COUNT VI
VIOLATION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA UNFAIR & DECEPTIVE
TRADE PRACTICES ACT, N.C. GEN. STAT. § 75-1.1

212.
All prior allegations contained in the Verified Complaint are pled as if fully set
forth in this paragraph.
213.
The actions and conduct of Defendants constitute unfair and deceptive acts or
practices, in or affecting commerce, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1.
214.
Plaintiff’s claims for unfair and deceptive trade practices against Defendants
include, but are not limited to, Defendants’ use and promotion in commerce of the confusingly
similar Infringing Mark and acorn logo that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn Logo in violation of

Plaintiff’s intellectual property rights in Plaintiff’s IP; Defendants’ continued use and promotion
of the confusingly similar Infringing Mark and acorn logo that is identical to Plaintiff’s Acorn
Logo following receipt of Plaintiff’s Cease & Desist letter; and Defendants’ knowing, intentional,
and willful violation of Plaintiff’s rights.
215.
Defendants’ actions constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair
methods of competition.
216.
As a direct, natural, and proximate result of Defendants’ unfair and deceptive acts
and practices, Plaintiff is entitled to, among other relief, injunctive relief and an award of actual
damages, treble damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees, and costs of the action as provided by N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 75-16 and § 75-16.1, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff BERINGER COMMERCE, INC. d/b/a BLUE ACORN iCi
respectfully requests that the Court grant the following relief against Defendants
BLUEACORN.CO, FIN CAP, INC., BLUE ACORN PPP, LLC, BLUE OAK FOREST, LLC,
MICHAEL S. COTA, JAMES FLORES, STEPHANIE HOCKRIDGE REIS, and NATHAN
REIS, jointly and severally:
1.
Judgment in favor of Plaintiff, plus interest as allowed by law;
2.
An award of all monetary damages allowed under state and federal law;
3.
Injunctive or other equitable relief as allowed under 15 U.S.C. § 1116, or as
otherwise allowed by state or federal law;
4.
Disgorgement of Defendants’ profits as allowed by state or federal law;
5.
That the costs of this action, including Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees, be
taxed by the Court against Defendants pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117, and other lawful authority;

6.
That any damages awarded to Plaintiff’s be trebled pursuant to the provisions of 15
U.S.C. §§ 1114-1119;
7.
Monetary relief under 17 U.S.C. § 101, et. seq., 17 U.S.C. § 501, 17 U.S.C. § 505,
and 17 U.S.C. § 504.
8.
That Plaintiff be awarded relief as provided by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1, et. seq;
9.
That any damages awarded to Plaintiff be trebled pursuant to the provisions of N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 75-16;
10.
An award of punitive damages;
11.
Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper; and
12.
A trial by jury.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 10th day of June, 2021.

/s/ Beth A. Stanfield

Beth A. Stanfield (N.C. State Bar No. 36296)
Thomas Babel (N.C. State Bar No. 35004)
Laura K. Greene (N.C. State Bar No. 47771)
FORREST FIRM, P.C.
105 Grace Street, Suite 101
Wilmington, NC 28401
T/F: (336) 275-6344
Beth.stanfield@forrestfirm.com
thomas.babel@forrestfirm.com
katie.greene@forrestfirm.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

5:21-cv-251
WESTERN

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.nced.187990.1.0.pdf
Size: 1,062,692 bytes
SHA-256: 563fab89b398fd8d8812188a6570abc9f076cbcd4c7b843af0345de21621e95e
Our copy: gov.uscourts.nced.187990.1.0.pdf
Original: PACER (login required)

Verified Complaint — Blue Acorn iCi v. Fin Cap, Inc. d/b/a Blueacorn.co (E.D.N.C. 5:21-cv-251) (E.D.N.C.)

Record facts

Full text

File and source

Related records