Giannis May 6 Lawsuit

Case 1:20-cv-03530-NRB Document 2 Filed 05/06/20 Page 1 of 21
Anastasi Pardalis
Pardalis & Nohavicka, LLP
950 Third Avenue, 25th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (718) 777-0400
Facsimile: (718) 777-0599
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
______________________________________
GIANNIS ANTETOKOUNMPO, Civ. Case No.
Plaintiff, COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL

DEMANDED
-v-
FAN CLOSET LLC, STEFEN HILL

and PHIL WILLETT
Defendants. ___
Plaintiff, GIANNIS ANTETOKOUNMPO (“Antetokounmpo” or “Plaintiff”), an
individual, by and through his undersigned attorneys, PARDALIS & NOHAVICKA, LLP, hereby
alleges as follows against Defendants FAN CLOSET LLC, STEFEN HILL, and PHIL WILLETT
(collectively “Defendants”):
NATURE OF ACTION
1. Antetokounmpo brings this action for the infringement of his GREEK FREAK
trademark by Defendants through the unauthorized use of the GREEK FREAK mark, including,
without limitation, by advertising, marketing, promoting, distributing, displaying, offering for sale
and selling unlicensed infringing products bearing the GREEK FREAK brand label.
2. This action involves claims for:
1
1) Trademark infringement of Antetokounmpo’s federally registered mark in
violation of §32 of the Federal Trademark (Lanham) Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et
seq.;
2) Counterfeiting of Antetokounmpo’s federally registered trademark in
violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1)(a)-(b), 1116(d), and 1117(b)-(c);
3) Federal Trademark Dilution;
4) False designation of origin, passing off and unfair competition in violation
of Section 43(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946, as amended with 15 U.S.C. §
1125(a);
5) Common Law Trade Name, Trademark and Service Mark Infringement;
6) Deceptive Acts and Practices (N.Y. Gen Bus L. § 349);
7) Common Law Trademark Dilution;
8) Common Law Unfair Competition;
9) Unjust Enrichment;
10) Tortious Interference with prospective economic advantage;
11) False Labeling in Violation of the Lanham Act;
12) Conspiracy and Concert of Action; and
13) Violation of Antetokounmpo’s right of publicity (NY Civ. Rights Law §
50-51).
3. Antetokounmpo is widely identified by his nickname the “Greek Freak.” Further,
has been using the nickname, Greek Freak, as a trademark in U.S. commerce (the “GREEK
FREAK mark”); Antetokounmpo’s products are distributed under the GREEK FREAK mark at
stores and markets throughout the United States.
2
4. Antetokounmpo has expended substantial time, money and resources successfully
developing, promoting and advertising his GREEK FREAK-branded products.
5. Through his efforts, and as a result of Antetokounmpo’s continuous and extensive
use of his GREEK FREAK mark, Antetokounmpo’s GREEK FREAK mark has become famous,
and exclusively associated with Antetokounmpo and Antetokounmpo’s products.
6. Nevertheless, upon information and belief, Defendants have been designing,
manufacturing, importing, selling and distributing apparel, such as phone cases, hoodies, baby
onesies and bodysuits, and other items of apparel under the GREEK FREAK mark.
7. Upon learning of Defendants’ unauthorized use of the GREEK FREAK mark and
brand, Antetokounmpo took immediate action and asked Defendants to provide him with a full
accounting of all merchandise sold by Defendants that is infringing upon Plaintiff’s trademark
(the “Infringing Products”).
8. Moreover, Antetokounmpo demanded that Defendants cease selling the Infringing
Products using the GREEK FREAK mark and brand.
9. Defendant, after receiving Antetokounmpo’s cease and desist letter, provided a
record of their alleged sales and profits of GREEK FREAK branded products.
10. However, Defendants failed to cooperate with Antetokounmpo’s request for
surrender of the infringing inventory and other reasonable requests which were meant to ensure
that the infringement has ceased and that the Antetokounmpo’s has been adequately compensated
for the damages he incurred.
11. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Antetokounmpo brings this action
for monetary and injunctive relief.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Federal Question Jurisdiction and Supplemental Jurisdiction
3
12. This action arises under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq. and the statutory
and common laws of the State of New York. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this
action over Plaintiff’s federal claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
13. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims under 28
U.S.C. §§ 1367(a), because they are so related to the claims within the original jurisdiction of the
Court that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States
Constitution.
14. Personal jurisdiction exists over Defendants in this judicial district pursuant to
N.Y.C.P.L.R. § 302(a)(1) and N.Y.C.P.L.R. § 302(a)(3), or in the alternative, Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 4(k), because, upon information and belief, Defendants regularly conduct, transacts
and/or solicits business in New York and in this judicial district, and/or derives substantial revenue
from this business transactions in New York and in this judicial district and/or otherwise avails
himself of the privileges and protections of the laws of the State of New York such that this Court’s
assertion of jurisdiction over Defendants does not offend traditional notions of fair play and due
process, and/or Defendants’ infringing actions caused injury to Plaintiff in New York and in this
judicial district such that Defendants should reasonably expect such actions to have consequences
in New York and in this judicial district, for example:
a) Upon information and belief, Defendants have been systematically directing and/or
targeting their business activities at consumers all over the country, including New York,
through their website where consumers can place orders.
b) Defendants’ website provides information about and describes the goods sold; it
further allows online sales with the use of a credit card and other means of payment, and it
provides for shipping of purchased items.
4
c) Upon information and belief, Defendants are aware of the products that Plaintiff
offers, namely the GREEK FREAK products and the GREEK FREAK mark. Defendants
are aware that their infringing actions, alleged herein, are likely to cause injury to Plaintiff
in New York and in this judicial district specifically, as Antetokounmpo conducts
substantial business in New York.
15. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c), because acts
giving rise to this complaint occurred within this judicial district.
THE PARTIES
16. Plaintiff, Giannis Antetokounmpo, is an individual residing in Chicago, Illinois.
Antetokounmpo is an internationally famous athlete and professional basketball player. Born in
Greece and currently residing in the United States.
17. In 2007, Plaintiff started playing basketball, and by 2009, he was playing
competitively for the youth squad of Filathlitikos. From 2013 to the present, he is playing for the
Milwaukee Bucks in the National Basketball Association (“NBA”). Antetokounmpo recently
won the MVP at the 2019 NBA Awards.
18. Giannis Antetokounmpo is widely known under his nickname the “GREEK
FREAK.” His popularity has been rising over the last years and he has participated or licensed his
name/nickname and/or likeness to various brands and campaigns.
19. Upon information and belief, Defendant Stefen Hill resides at 7660 Beverly Blvd,
Unit 343, Los Angeles CA 90036.
20. Upon information and belief, Defendant Phil Willett resides at 3162 Jenkins
Avenue, San Jose CA 95118.
5
21. Upon information and belief, Defendant Fan Closet LLC is a California Limited
Liability Company, with an address at c/o STEPHEN HILL 7660 Beverly Blvd, Unit 343, Los
Angeles CA 90036.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL CLAIMS
Antetokounmpo’s recognized GREEK FREAK Mark
22. Antetokounmpo has built a strong reputation for his professional skills which is
further reflected in the quality of the products he offers.
23. Antetokounmpo has continually used his GREEK FREAK mark in connection with
his products in U.S. commerce at least as early as 2017. He has been identified as the “GREEK
FREAK” even earlier than that, due to his impressive professional abilities and achievements.
24. During this time, Plaintiff has engaged in substantial advertising and promotion,
and has expended substantial time, money and resources successfully developing and promoting
the GREEK FREAK mark and brand.
25. Plaintiff has also entered into licensing and other similar agreements with thirds
parties, for the authorized use of the GREEK FREAK mark in commerce in connection with a
variety of goods.
26. The GREEK FREAK products are directly associated with Antetokounmpo as he
is recognized as the “Greek Freak,” and they distinguish themselves among competitive products
based on their association with Antetokounmpo and their superior design and quality.
27. In addition to continuous and uninterrupted use in commerce, Antetokounmpo has
applied for, and obtained a federal registration for his GREEK FREAK mark (EXHIBIT A).
Antetokounmpo has also applied for a variation of his GREEK FREAK mark, namely for the mark
“GREEK FR34K” which includes the numbers appearing on his NBA jersey. This mark has been
6
approved for registration and no third party oppositions have been filed against it; therefore it will
be registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office soon (EXHIBIT B). This mark
also covers apparel and related items, among others.
28. Antetokounmpo’s U.S. trademark registration for the GREEK FREAK mark covers
“Backpacks” in International Class 18 and “Shirts, t-shirts, sweatshirts, hooded sweatshirts, jackets,
hooded jackets, sports jerseys, socks, warm up suits, caps, hats” in International Class 25
(Registration No. 5401870).
29. Antetokounmpo has expended substantial time, money and resources successfully
developing, promoting and advertising his GREEK FREAK mark.
30. Antetokounmpo has sold tens of thousands of dollars of products under the GREEK
FREAK mark.
31. Antetokounmpo has used the GREEK FREAK brand continuously and exclusively,
and any products offered under that mark are directly associated with him.
32. As a result, Plaintiff’s mark has become famous, and an extremely valuable asset
for Plaintiff.
Defendants’ Infringing Activities
33. Notwithstanding Antetokounmpo’s established rights in the GREEK FREAK mark,
upon information and belief, Defendants have advertised and sold various products under the
“GREEK FREAK” name through various media, platforms, and websites, including their website
https://www.fancloset.com/ (EXHIBIT C).
34. Defendants have engaged in this infringing activity despite having constructive
notice of Antetokounmpo’s federal trademark rights under 15 U.S.C. § 1072 and despite having
7
actual knowledge of Antetokounmpo’s use of the GREEK FREAK mark, since Defendants offer
directly competitive products in the same marketplace.
35. Defendants’ use of the GREEK FREAK mark postdates the date of first use of the
GREEK FREAK mark by Plaintiff.
36. Antetokounmpo never authorized Defendants to design, advertise, sell and
distribute products bearing the GREEK FREAK mark.
37. On March 27, 2020, Plaintiff, through his attorneys, sent a Cease and Desist letter
to Defendants (EXHIBIT D), alerting them of Plaintiff’s exclusive rights in the mark and
requesting an accounting of all profits generated.
38. Defendants after receiving Antetokounmpo’s cease and desist letter, provided a
record of their alleged sales and profits of GREEK FREAK branded products.
39. However, Defendants failed to cooperate with Plaintiff in good faith to reach an
agreement that would ensure that infringement has ceased and Plaintiff is reasonably compensated
for the damage he incurred.
40. Upon information and belief, before removing the “GREEK FREAK” from their
website, Defendants had made substantial sales of products under it, capitalizing upon Plaintiff’s
famous mark.
41. Upon information and belief, the products offered by Defendants under the GREEK
FREAK mark were of a particular aesthetic not aligned with Plaintiff and of a substantially lower
quality than the products offered by Plaintiff. Therefore, Defendants’ actions constitute trademark
dilution by garnishment.
8
42. Defendants’ use of the GREEK FREAK mark is directly competitive with
Plaintiff’s use of the mark on his products and has caused confusion, mistake, and deception as to
the source of Defendants’ goods and services.
43. Defendants’ failure to cooperate with Plaintiff in the face of a demand to cease
and desist its infringing activities and to provide proof of sales and profits derived therefrom,
demonstrates Defendants’ bad faith intent to profit from Plaintiff’s success, by misleading,
confusing and deceiving consumers.
44. There is no question that the products sold by Defendant under the GREEK
FREAK mark were sold by Defendant with the purpose of confusing and misleading consumers
into believing that they are purchasing products associated with or endorsed by Giannis
Antetokounmpo, one of the most successful and popular NBA players. Defendant therefore
traded off the goodwill and reputation of Antetokounmpo by engaging in the unauthorized use of
Antetokounmpo’s trademark and publicity rights.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Trademark Infringement of Plaintiff’s Federal Registered Mark
[15 U.S.C. § 1114/Lanham Act § 32(a)]
45. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation in the foregoing
paragraphs of this Complaint.
46. Since the early days of his career, Antetokounmpo has been identified as the
“GREEK FREAK,” and since at least as early as 2017, he has continuously and extensively used
the GREEK FREAK mark in commerce, and has built its reputation under the same mark.
47. Antetokounmpo owns Federal Registration No. 5401870 for the GREEK FREAK
mark. This registration is valid, substituting, and prima facie evidence of the validity of the
9
GREEK FREAK mark, Plaintiff’s ownership of the mark, and Plaintiff’s exclusive right to use the
mark in commerce.
48. Defendants made unauthorized use of the GREEK FREAK mark for apparel that
are confusingly similar to, related to, and directly competitive with Antetokounmpo’s goods sold
under the GREAK FREAK mark.
49. Defendants’ unauthorized use of the GREEK FREAK mark is likely to cause
confusion, mistake, and deception as to the source, sponsorship or approval of Defendants’
products and/or result in the mistaken belief that Defendants are somehow legitimately affiliated,
connected or associated with Antetokounmpo.
50. Defendants’ aforesaid act, specifically Defendants’ unlawful misappropriation of
the GREEK FREAK mark, constitute willful trademark infringement of a federally registered
trademark in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114.
51. By reason of Defendants’ aforesaid acts, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to
suffer damage and injury to its business reputation and goodwill and will sustain loss of revenue
and profits.
52. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants will potentially continue to perform the
acts complained of herein and cause said damages and injury, all to the immediate and irreparable
harm of Plaintiff. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law for Defendants’ wrongful acts.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Trademark Counterfeiting Under Section 32, 34 and 35 of the Lanham Act,
15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1)(b), 1116(d), and 1117(b)-(c)
54. Plaintiff is the exclusive owner of all right and title to the GREEK FREAK mark.
10
55. Plaintiff has continuously used the GREEK FREAK mark in interstate commerce
since on or before the date of the first use as reflected in its registration attached hereto as Exhibit
A.
56. Without Plaintiff’s authorization or consent, with knowledge of Plaintiff’s rights in
the GREEK FREAK mark and with knowledge that Defendants’ products bear counterfeit marks,
Defendants intentionally reproduced, copied and/or colorable imitated the GREEK FREAK mark
on products which are indistinguishable from the actual/original products offered under the
GREEK FREAK mark by Plaintiff.
57. Defendants’ infringing products are likely to cause confusion, mistake and
deception among the general purchasing public as to the origin of these infringing products, and
are likely to deceive consumers, the public and the trade into believing that Defendants’ infringing
products originate from, are associated with or are otherwise authorized or endorsed by Plaintiff.
58. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ illegal actions alleged herein,
Defendants have caused substantial monetary loss and irreparable injury and damage to Plaintiff,
his business, reputation and valuable rights in the GREEK FREAK mark and the goodwill
associated therewith, in an amount as yet unknown, but to be determined at trial.
59. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.
60. Unless immediately enjoined, Defendants will continue to cause such substantial
and irreparable injury, loss and damage to Plaintiff.
61. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief, damages for the irreparable harm caused by
Defendants’ infringing activities, and all gains, profits and advantages obtained by Defendants as
a result therefrom, enhanced discretionary damages, treble damages and/or statutory damages of
11
up to $2,000,000.00 per counterfeit mark per type of goods sold, offered for sale or distributed and
reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Federal Trademark Dilution (15 U.S.C. § 1125 (c))
63. As a result of Plaintiff’s widespread and continuous use of his GREEK FREAK
mark in commerce in the United States and as a result of Plaintiff’s fame and direct association
with such mark, the GREEK FREAK mark is famous within the meaning of relevant statutes.
64. Defendants’ unauthorized commercial use of the GREK FREAK mark was
willfully intended to trade on Plaintiff’s reputation.
65. Defendants’ unauthorized commercial use of the GREEK FREAK mark has
caused and continues to cause irreparable injury to Plaintiff and his business reputation and has
diluted the distinctive quality of Plaintiff’s famous GREEK FREAK mark within the meaning of
15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
66. Upon information and belief, Defendants have profited or will profit through their
wrongful conduct and activities.
67. Defendants’ conduct complained herein is malicious, fraudulent, deliberate,
and/or willful.
68. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief, and is
entitled to recover damages by reason of Defendants’ acts.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

False designation of Origin, Passing Off and Unfair Competition
[15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)/Lanham Act § 43(a)]
12
70. Plaintiff as the owner of all right, title and interest in and to the GREEK FREAK
mark, has standing to maintain an action for false designation of origin and unfair competition
under Federal Trademark Statute, Lanham Act § 43(a) (16 U.S.C. § 1125).
71. Since 2017, Plaintiff has continuously and extensively advertised and marketed
his products under his GREEK FREAK mark throughout the United States.
72. Plaintiff’s GREEK FREAK mark is inherently distinctive.
73. As a result of Plaintiff’s continuous use of the GREEK FREAK mark in
connection with his products and Plaintiff’s reputation and fame, the GREEK FREAK mark has
become widely recognized among consumers as a source-identifier of Plaintiff’s products.
74. Defendants’ unauthorized use of the GREEK FREAK mark in connection with
apparel and phone case products causes confusion, mistake, and deception as to the source,
sponsorship, or approval of Defendants’ products by Plaintiff and results in the mistaken belief
that Defendants and their products are somehow legitimately affiliated, connected or associated
with Plaintiff.
75. By designing, advertising, marketing, promoting, distributing, offering for sale or
otherwise dealing with the infringing products, Defendants have traded off the goodwill of Plaintiff
and his products, thereby directly and unfairly competing with Plaintiff.
76. Defendants knew, or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that
the infringing products would cause confusion, mistake and deception among consumers and the
public.
13
77. Defendants’ aforesaid acts constitute willful unfair competition with Plaintiff, in
violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
78. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful actions have
been knowing, deliberate, willful, intended to cause confusion, to cause mistake and to deceive
consumers and were performed with the intent to trade on the goodwill and reputation of Plaintiff.
79. By reason of Defendants’ aforesaid acts, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to
suffer damage and injury to its business, reputation and goodwill, and will sustain loss of revenue
and profits.
80. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants will continue to perform the acts
complained of herein and cause said damages and injury, all to the immediate and irreparable
harm of Plaintiff. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law for Defendant’s wrongful acts.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Common Law Trade Name, Trademark Infringement
81. Plaintiff incorporated by reference each and every allegation in the foregoing
82. Plaintiff has established and enjoys common law trade name and trademark rights
in the GREEK FREAK mark in connection with clothing and related products, through continuous,
extensive and uninterrupted use of the mark in commerce throughout the United States.
83. By their wrongful acts, Defendants have caused, and unless restrained by this Court
will continue to cause, serious and irreparable injury and damage to Plaintiff and to the goodwill,
reputation and proven business success associated with the GREEK FREAK mark.
84. Upon information and belief, Defendants have profited by their conduct and
activities.
14
85. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ conduct complained of herein is
malicious, fraudulent, deliberate, and/or willful.
86. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Deceptive Acts and Unfair Trade Practices (N.Y. Gen Bus L. § 349)
88. Defendants’ activities consist of deceptive acts and practices in the conduct of
their business.
89. Defendants’ aforementioned deceptive acts are aimed at consumers, and are
materially misleading with respect to the source, sponsorship, and affiliation or approval of
Defendants’ activities, and/or falsely suggest that Defendants are somehow legitimately
affiliated, connected, or associated with Plaintiff.
90. Plaintiff has been, and will continue to be, damaged by Defendants’ deceptive
acts and practices in an amount to be determined at trial.
91. Defendants have caused, and will continue to cause, irreparable injury to Plaintiff
and to the public unless restrained by this Court, pursuant to N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 349.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Trademark Dilution (N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 360-1)
93. Defendants’ aforesaid acts have created a likelihood of injury to the business
reputation of Plaintiff and likelihood of dilution of the distinctive quality of the GREEK FREAK
mark.
15
94. Defendants’ acts have caused, and will continue to cause irreparable injury to
Plaintiff unless restrained by this Court, pursuant to N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 360-1.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Common Law Unfair Competition
96. Defendants’ aforesaid activities constitute deliberate passing off, unfair
competition, misappropriation, unjust enrichment, unfair and fraudulent business practices, and
misuse of Plaintiff’s GREEK FREAK mark under the common law of the State of New York.
97. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ conduct is willful, deliberate,
intentional, and in bad faith.
98. By reason of Defendants’ aforesaid acts, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue
to suffer damage and injury to its business, reputation and good will, and will sustain loss of
revenues and profits.
99. Unless and until enjoined by this Court, Defendants will continue to perform the
acts complained herein and cause said damages and injury, all to the immediate and irreparable
harm of Plaintiff. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law for Defendants’ wrongful acts.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Unjust Enrichment
101. By virtue of the egregious and illegal acts of Defendants as described herein,
Defendants have been unjustly enriched in an amount to be proven at trial.
16
102. Defendants’ retention of monies gained through their deceptive business
practices, infringement, acts of deceit, and otherwise would serve to unjustly enrich Defendants
and would be contrary to the interests of justice.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Tortious Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage
103. Plaintiff incorporated by reference each and every allegation in the foregoing
104. Plaintiff has enjoyed long and successful business relationships with its
authorized distributors and customers.
105. Defendants’ conduct has interfered with these relationships and constitutes
tortious interference with prospective business relationships with these distributors and
customers.
106. Defendants employed wrongful means in an effort to harm Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s
reputation, Plaintiff’s relationship with his customers and his distribution network, for which
Defendants and any other identified person or entity who has acted in concert or in participation
with him, are liable to Plaintiff for actual and punitive damages in an amount to be proven at
trial.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

False Labeling in Violation of the Lanham Act
108. Defendants have used the GREEK FREAK mark in order to promote, distribute,
offer for sale and sell their products, inter alia, by labeling such products with the GREEK
FREAK mark.
17
109. Defendants’ actions constitute a direct violation of Plaintiff’s trademark rights in
the GREEK FREAK mark.
110. Plaintiff is the sole owner of the GREEK FREAK mark.
111. Defendants’ false labeling has caused confusion, mistake, and deception among
buyers of the counterfeited products and all purchasers of the GREEK FREAK products as to
Defendants’ affiliation, connection, or association with Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s authorized
distributors.
112. The false trade statements have also caused confusion, mistake, and deception
among buyers of the counterfeited products and all purchasers of the GREEK FREAK brand
products as to the origin, sponsorship, approval or endorsement by Plaintiff of the above-pled
counterfeit goods.
113. By setting forth the false labeling on the counterfeit goods, and as pled above in
this Complaint, Defendants have proximately contributed to the harm that Plaintiff has suffered.
114. Defendants have therefore committed an actionable wrong under 15 U.S.C. §
1125(a)(1)(A) and is liable to Plaintiff for such remedies as are afforded it under 15 U.S.C. §§
1117 and 1125(a)(1).
TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Conspiracy and Concert of Action
116. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff has conspired with unknown manufacturers
and/or suppliers in the U.S. and/or overseas and other persons to illegally manufacture and/or
import in the United States, products under the GREEK FREAK mark.
18
117. Defendants’ conduct combined with the conduct of unknown third parties
constituted conspiracy and concert of action to tortuously interfere with Plaintiff’s business, for
which each conspirator is liable to Plaintiff for damages.
THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of Right of Publicity
119. Defendants knowingly used the Plaintiff’s name and nickname, which is part of
Plaintiff’s identity; such use resulted in Defendants’ commercial advantage; such use was made
without Plaintiff’s consent; and the Plaintiff has been injured financially because of such use.
120. Defendants used Plaintiff’s name and nickname through Defendants’ website,
which is accessible by and targets consumers throughout the U.S., including New York.
121. Defendants have therefore committed an actionable wrong under NY Civ. Rights
Law § 50 and is liable to Plaintiff for such remedies as are afforded it under NY Civ. Rights Law
§ 51.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor and against
Defendants on all its claims and award the following to Plaintiff:
1. Preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining Defendants and their
agents, attorneys, employees, and all others in active concern or participation with them from:
(a) any further acts of infringement of Plaintiff’s intellectual property rights in the
GREEK FREAK mark, and in any similar mark Plaintiff owns, uses and/or may use.
19
(b) using Plaintiff’s name, portrait, likeness and/or the GREEK FREAK mark and any
variation that is confusingly similar to the Plaintiff’s mark unless expressly and specifically
authorized by Plaintiff.
(c) doing any act or thing that is likely to dilute the distinctiveness of Plaintiff’s
GREEK FREAK mark or that is likely to tarnish the goodwill associated with it.
2. An order, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a), directing Defendants to file with the
Court and serve on counsel for Plaintiff within thirty (30) days after the entry of injunction
issued by this Court, a sworn statement setting forth in detail the manner and form in which
Defendants have complied with the injunction;
3. The following damages:
(a) All monetary actual and/or statutory damages sustained and to be sustained by
Plaintiff as a consequence of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, said amount to be trebled
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117 N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 349, N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 360-m,
and/or any other applicable statute;
(b) All exemplary and/or punitive damages to which Plaintiff is entitled under
statutory or common law;
(c) Pre-judgment interest according to law;
(d) Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117, N.Y. Gen.
Bus. L. § 349, N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 360-m, and/or any other applicable statute, together
with the costs and disbursements of this action; and
4. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
20
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff Antetokounmpo, an individual, hereby demands a jury trial.
Dated: New York, New York

May 6, 2020
Respectfully submitted,
PARDALIS & NOHAVICKA, LLP
By: ___/s/Anastasi Pardalis______

Anastasi Pardalis
Attorneys for Plaintiff
950 Third Avenue, 25th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Tel.: (718) 777 0400
Fax: (718) 777 0599
[email protected]
21

Giannis May 6 Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Giannis May 6 Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:20-cv-03530-NRB Document 2 Filed 05/06/20 Page 1 of 21

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL

FAN CLOSET LLC, STEFEN HILL

Plaintiff, GIANNIS ANTETOKOUNMPO (“Antetokounmpo” or “Plaintiff”), an

2. This action involves claims for:

1) Trademark infringement of Antetokounmpo’s federally registered mark in

violation of §32 of the Federal Trademark (Lanham) Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et

2) Counterfeiting of Antetokounmpo’s federally registered trademark in

violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1)(a)-(b), 1116(d), and 1117(b)-(c);

3) Federal Trademark Dilution;

4) False designation of origin, passing off and unfair competition in violation

of Section 43(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946, as amended with 15 U.S.C. §

5) Common Law Trade Name, Trademark and Service Mark Infringement;

6) Deceptive Acts and Practices (N.Y. Gen Bus L. § 349);

7) Common Law Trademark Dilution;

8) Common Law Unfair Competition;

10) Tortious Interference with prospective economic advantage;

11) False Labeling in Violation of the Lanham Act;

12) Conspiracy and Concert of Action; and

13) Violation of Antetokounmpo’s right of publicity (NY Civ. Rights Law §

3. Antetokounmpo is widely identified by his nickname the “Greek Freak.” Further,

stores and markets throughout the United States.

4. Antetokounmpo has expended substantial time, money and resources successfully

developing, promoting and advertising his GREEK FREAK-branded products.

5. Through his efforts, and as a result of Antetokounmpo’s continuous and extensive

and exclusively associated with Antetokounmpo and Antetokounmpo’s products.

6. Nevertheless, upon information and belief, Defendants have been designing,

(the “Infringing Products”).

8. Moreover, Antetokounmpo demanded that Defendants cease selling the Infringing

Products using the GREEK FREAK mark and brand.

9. Defendant, after receiving Antetokounmpo’s cease and desist letter, provided a

10. However, Defendants failed to cooperate with Antetokounmpo’s request for

for the damages he incurred.

11. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Antetokounmpo brings this action

for monetary and injunctive relief.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

in New York and in this judicial district, for example:

through their website where consumers can place orders.

provides for shipping of purchased items.

in New York and in this judicial district specifically, as Antetokounmpo conducts

substantial business in New York.

giving rise to this complaint occurred within this judicial district.

16. Plaintiff, Giannis Antetokounmpo, is an individual residing in Chicago, Illinois.

Antetokounmpo is an internationally famous athlete and professional basketball player. Born in

Greece and currently residing in the United States.

Milwaukee Bucks in the National Basketball Association (“NBA”). Antetokounmpo recently

won the MVP at the 2019 NBA Awards.

name/nickname and/or likeness to various brands and campaigns.

Unit 343, Los Angeles CA 90036.

Avenue, San Jose CA 95118.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL CLAIMS

Antetokounmpo’s recognized GREEK FREAK Mark

further reflected in the quality of the products he offers.

the GREEK FREAK mark and brand.

27. In addition to continuous and uninterrupted use in commerce, Antetokounmpo has

also covers apparel and related items, among others.

(Registration No. 5401870).

developing, promoting and advertising his GREEK FREAK mark.

Defendants’ Infringing Activities

33. Notwithstanding Antetokounmpo’s established rights in the GREEK FREAK mark,

https://www.fancloset.com/ (EXHIBIT C).

directly competitive products in the same marketplace.