UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Candyland, Inc.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Snyders-Lance, Inc.,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. ____________________
COMPLAINT
(Jury Trial Demanded)
Plaintiff Candyland, Inc. (Candyland), for its Complaint against Defendant
Snyders-Lance, Inc. (Snyders-Lance), alleges as follows:
PARTIES
1. Candyland is a Minnesota corporation having a principal place of business
in St. Paul, Minnesota.
2. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lance is a North Carolina
corporation with its principal place of business in Charlotte, North Carolina.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted in this
action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1121(a) and 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338, and 1367. The
claims alleged in this Complaint arise under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq.,
Minn. Stat 325D.44, et seq., and Minnesota Common Law.
4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Snyders-Lance because
Snyders-Lance does significant business in the State of Minnesota.
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 10
- 2 -
5. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1) and (c)(2).
FACTS
Candylands CHICAGO MIX Popcorn
6. Candyland is a small-family owned business that has been in business for
over 80 years and specializes in the sale of high-quality popcorn, candy and fine
chocolates.
7. Candylands popcorn comes in a variety of flavors and is popped fresh,
hand-stirred, and bagged every day.
8. Candyland is the owner of federal trademark Registration No. 1,713,984 for
the trademark CHICAGO MIX for use in connection with flavored popcorn.
9. Specifically, Candyland uses its CHICAGO MIX mark in connection
with its combination of traditional seasoned popcorn mixed with caramel and cheddar
flavored popcorns. Candylands CHICAGO MIX popcorn is one of the companys
best sellers.
10. For over two decades, Candyland has been continually and exclusively
using the CHICAGO MIX mark nationwide in interstate commerce to identify its goods
and distinguish its goods from those made and sold by others.
11. Due to the continual use of the CHICAGO MIX mark by Candyland, the
mark has acquired secondary meaning as indicating a single source of Candylands
goods. The CHICAGO MIX mark has further come to indicate Candyland as the single
source of such quality goods.
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 2 of 10
- 3 -
12. Candyland has expended considerable time, resources, and effort in
promoting the CHICAGO MIX mark and developing substantial goodwill associated
therewith.
13. The CHICAGO MIX mark is an extremely important asset to Candyland
and Candyland has enforced the mark against infringers and potential infringers.
Snyders-Lances Infringing CHICAGO MIX Popcorn
14. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lance is a business that
manufactures and markets snack food products.
15. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lances products are distributed
widely through grocery and mass merchandisers, convenience stores, club stores, food
service outlets and other channels.
16. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lance manufactures and markets a
line of popcorn products under the O-KE-DOKE mark.
17. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lances O-KE-DOKE line of
popcorn is sold in stores throughout the United States, including Minnesota. In
Minnesota, the O-KE-DOKE line is sold in stores such as, without limitation, Rainbow
Food Stores, Cub Foods, Jerrys Foods, Wal Mart, and K Mart.
18. Upon information and belief, consumers can also purchase O-KE-DOKE
popcorn at Snyders-Lances online store at http://snydersofhanover.stores.yahoo.net.
19. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lances O-KE-DOKE line
consists of a number of flavors of popcorn, including a combination of cheese and
caramel corn mixed together, which Snyders-Lance refers to as CHICAGO MIX.
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 3 of 10
- 4 -
20. The CHICAGO MIX mark used in connection with Snyders-Lances O-
KE-DOKE flavored popcorn is identical to Candylands CHICAGO MIX mark.
21. Without Candylands permission, authorization, approval or consent, and
with actual knowledge of Candylands prior rights in its CHICAGO MIX trademark,
Snyders-Lance commenced use of the confusingly similar CHICAGO MIX mark in
connection with flavored popcorn.
22. Snyders-Lances use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in connection with its
flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception. Consumers have
and are likely to continue to mistakenly believe that the flavored popcorn Snyders-Lance
offers as CHICAGO MIX is sponsored, endorsed, or approved by Candyland, or is in
some other way affiliated, connected, or associated with Candyland, all to the detriment
of Candyland.
23. Upon information and belief, unlike Candylands popped popcorn, which is
popped fresh, hand-stirred, and bagged every day, the O-KE-DOKE line is pre-bagged
and shipped to various stores throughout the country for sale to the consumer.
24. Upon information and belief, Candyland and Snyders-Lance target the
same class of consumer.
25. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lance markets its O-KE-DOKE
popcorn in the same channels of trade used by Candyland to market its CHICAGO
MIX flavored popcorn.
26. Candyland has demanded that Snyders-Lance cease all use of the
CHICAGO MIX mark in connection with Snyders-Lances sale of flavored popcorn,
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 4 of 10
- 5 -
but Snyders-Lance has not done so. Despite Candylands objection, Snyders-Lance
continues to use the identical and confusingly similar CHICAGO MIX mark in
connection with closely related products.
27. Upon information and belief, Snyders-Lance intentionally adopted the
confusingly similar CHICAGO MIX mark and incorporated it in order to trade off the
goodwill Candyland has created in its CHICAGO MIX mark.
COUNT I
(Trademark Infringement of a Registered Mark)
(Lanham Act 32, 15 U.S.C. 1114)
28. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
29. Snyders-Lances unauthorized use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in
connection with flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, cause mistake, or to
deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Snyders-Lance with
Candyland, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Snyders-Lances popcorn
products by Candyland. This unauthorized use of CHICAGO MIX constitutes
trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. 1114.
30. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have caused, and will continue to cause,
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined.
31. Snyders-Lance has profited from its unlawful actions and has been
unjustly enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have
caused Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount
to be determined at trial.
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 5 of 10
- 6 -
COUNT II
(Federal Unfair Competition)
(Lanham Act 43(a), 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))
32. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
33. Snyders-Lances unauthorized use of CHICAGO MIX in connection
with flavored popcorn is a false designation of origin, false or misleading description of
fact, and a false or misleading representation of fact.
34. Snyders-Lances unauthorized use of CHICAGO MIX in connection
with flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to
the affiliation, connection, or association of Snyders-Lance with Candyland, or as to the
origin, sponsorship, or approval of Snyders-Lances flavored popcorn or commercial
activities by Candyland.
35. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have caused, and will continue to cause,
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined.
36. Snyders-Lance has profited from its unlawful actions and has been
unjustly enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have
caused Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount
to be determined at trial.
COUNT III
(Minnesota Deceptive Trade Practices Act)
(Minn. Stat. 325D.44, et seq.)
37. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 6 of 10
- 7 -
38. Snyders-Lances unauthorized use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in
connection with flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Snyders-Lance with
Candyland, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Snyders-Lances flavored
popcorn or commercial activities by Candyland and constitutes unfair and deceptive trade
practices under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act of the State of Minnesota.
39. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have caused and will continue to cause
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined, and its actions also create a risk of future
harm.
40. Snyders-Lance has profited from its unlawful actions and has been
unjustly enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have
caused Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount
to be determined at trial.
COUNT IV
(Common Law Unfair Competition)
41. Candyland restates and incorporates by reference the allegations in the
previous paragraphs of this Complaint.
42. Snyders-Lances unauthorized use of the CHICAGO MIX mark in
connection with flavored popcorn is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Snyders-Lance with
Candyland, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Snyders-Lances flavored
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 7 of 10
- 8 -
popcorn or commercial activities by Candyland and constitutes common law unfair
competition under Minnesota state law.
43. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have caused, and will continue to cause,
Candyland irreparable harm unless enjoined.
44. Snyders-Lance has profited from its unlawful actions and has been
unjustly enriched to the detriment of Candyland. Snyders-Lances unlawful actions have
caused Candyland monetary damage in an amount presently unknown, but in an amount
to be determined at trial.
CONCLUSION
WHEREFORE, Candyland prays that the Court enter judgment:
1. In favor of Candyland and against Snyders-Lance on all of Candylands
claims;
2. Permanently enjoining and restraining Snyders-Lance, its parent company,
subsidiaries, affiliates, sister companies, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys,
and all others in active concert or participation with Snyders-Lance from:
A. Using the mark CHICAGO MIX or any confusingly similar
designation alone or in combination with other words or designs, as a trademark,
trade name component or otherwise, to market, advertise, or identify goods and
services not produced or authorized by Candyland;
B. Unfairly competing with Candyland in any manner whatsoever;
C. Causing likelihood of confusion or injury to business reputation of
the distinctiveness of Candylands CHICAGO MIX mark; and
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 8 of 10
- 9 -
D. Committing any other act that infringes Candylands CHICAGO
MIX mark or constitutes an act of trademark or service mark infringement,
contributory infringement, or unfair competition under federal common law or
Minnesota state law.
3. Requiring Snyders-Lance to deliver up, or cause to be delivered up, for
destruction all labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, advertisements, and
all other materials in Snyders-Lances possession or control that infringe Candylands
CHICAGO MIX mark;
4. Requiring Snyders-Lance to account for and pay over to Candyland the
amount of Candylands damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
5. Requiring Snyders-Lance to account for and pay over to Candyland the
amount of Snyders-Lances profits pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
6. Requiring Snyders-Lance to account for and pay over to Candyland the
costs of the action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
7. Finding this case is exceptional and trebling any damage award pursuant to
15 U.S.C. 1117;
8. Finding this case is exceptional and requiring Snyders-Lance to pay over
to Candyland its attorneys fees incurred in connection with this case pursuant to 15
U.S.C. 1117;
9. Requiring Snyders-Lance to account for and pay over to Candyland the
amount of Candylands damages, together with costs and disbursements, including costs
of investigation and reasonable attorneys fees;
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 9 of 10
- 10 -
10. Requiring Snyders-Lance to pay Candyland pre- and post- judgment
interest, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 549.09; and
11. Awarding Candyland such other relief as the Court may deem just and
equitable.
Respectfully submitted,
WINTHROP & WEINSTINE, P.A.
Dated: August 8, 2014 s/David A. Davenport
David A. Davenport, #285109
Erin O. Dungan, #386430
3500 Capella Tower
225 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Tel: (612) 604-6400
Fax: (612) 604-6800
E-Mail: ddavenport@winthrop.com
edungan@winthrop.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Candyland, Inc.
9382790v1
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 10 of 10
J S 44 (Rev. 12112)
CIVIL COVER SHEET
The J S 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by theJ udicial Conference of theUnited States inSeptember 1974, isrequired for the useof the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating thecivil docket sheet. (SEE INS71WC71ONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
Candyland, Inc.
Attorneys (If Known)
DEFENDANTS
Snyder's-Lance, Inc.
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff B..rn'. County .
(EXCEPT IN u . s . PLAINI1FF CASES)
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant .M~.9<1~nblJ f9 ..Q9.Y lliY ,..I'l.Q _
(IN us. PLAIN71FF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCA TlON OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)
Winthrop &Weinstine, P.A., 3500 Capella Tower, 225 South Sixth Street,
Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 604-6400
o I u.s.Government
Plaintiff
II. BASISOF J URISDICTION (Place an "X" in One Box Only)
o 2 U.S. Government
Defendant
~ 3 Federal Question
( U . s . Government Not a Party)
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an "X" in One Boxfor Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box jar Defendant)
PTF DEF PTF DEF
o4 Diversity
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
Citizen of This State 0 I 0 I Incorporated or Principal Place 0 4 04
of Business In This State
Citizen of Another State o 2 0 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 0 5 05
of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a o 3 0 3 Foreign Nation 0 6 06
Foreian Countrv
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an "X" in One Box Only)
I\llll!0IiZii1ff!:<'!t5l11Tru\t\ID !lllBfifi , f l @ W !
o210 Land Condemnation
o220 Foreclosure
o230 Rent Lease &Ejectment
o240 Torts to Land
o245 Tort Product Liability
o290 All Other Real Property
PERSONAL INJ URY
0310 Airplane
o315 Airplane Product
Liability
o320 Assault, Libel &
PERSONAL INJ URY
o365 Personal Injury .
Product Liability
o367 Health Carel
Pharmaceutical
Personal Injury
Product Liability
o368 Asbestos Personal
o625 Drug Related Seizure
of Property 21USC 881
0690 Other
o422 Appeal 28 USC 158
o423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
o 375 False Claims Act
o
o
~~~~~~~~~mO
Wfi\'Ru~iaPEIi- i_ ':- 1: R:I@ HY -,:S'fk% Mi% a
o820 Copyrights 0
o830 Patent 0
~ 840 Trademark
400 State Reapportionment
410 Antitrust
430 Banks and Banking
450 Commerce
460 Deportation
470 Racketeer Influenced and
o861 HIA (139511)
o862 Black Lung (923)
o863 D1WC/D1WW (405(g))
o864 SSJ D Title XVI
o865 RSI (405(g))
Corrupt Organizations
o 480 Consumer Credit
gW1m !&ilm!Wmitlimim ~0 490 Cable/Sat TV
o 850 Securities/Commodities/
Exchange
o 890 Other Statutory Actions
o 891 Agricultural Acts
o 893 Environmental Matters
o
o370 Other Fraud
Injury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY 0 710 Fair Labor Standards
895 Freedom of Information
Act
o 110Insurance
o 120Marine
o 130Miller Act
o 140Negotiable Instrument
o 150Recovery of Overpayment
&Enforcement of J udgment Slander
o151Medicare Act 0 330 Federal Employers'
o 152Recovery of Defaulted Liability
Student Loans 0 340 Marine
(Excludes Veterans)
o 153Recovery of Overpayment
of Veteran's Benefits
o 160 Stockholders' Suits
o 190Other Contract
o 195Contract Product Liability
o 196Franchise
o345 Marine Product
Liability
o350 Motor Vehicle
o355 Motor Vehicle 0 371 Truth in Lending 0 720 Labor/Management
Product Liability 0 380 Other Personal Relations
o360 Other Personal Property Damage 0 740 Railway Labor Act
Injury 0 385 Property Damage 0 751 Family and Medical
o362 Personal Injury- Product Liability Leave Act
Medical Malpractice 0 790 Other Labor Litigation
IB% \\@iii1iREAU!RRORERTlR\S% Ri@ 1t liflWl$l't:lIY ID1RitifflmSl!iiiiit 1'I {ijRRfSONEltilltll'XlmIOlIISi;\i! 0 791 Employee Retirement
o440 Other Civil Rights
0441 Voting
o442 Employment
o443 Housing!
Accommodations
o445 Amer. w/Disabilities .
Employment
o446 Amer. wlDisabilities .
Other
o448 Education
Habeas Corpus:
o463 Alien Detainee
o510 Motions to Vacate
Sentence
o530 General
o535 Death Penalty
Other:
o540 Mandamus & Other
o550 Civil Rights
o555 Prison Condition
o 560 Civil Detainee-
Conditions of
Confinement
Act
Income Security Act 0 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
or Defendant)
o871 IRS- Third Party
26 USC 7609
o 896 Arbitration
1I1l!m!iJ ~~~~!m!l)j. 0 899 Administrative Procedure
ActlReview or Appeal of
Agency Decision
o 950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes
o 4 Reinstated or
Reopened
o 5 Transferred from
Another District
(specify)
o6 Multidistrict
Litigation
:tii,;".\",l,ll\IMIGRAT1QN\\\\"><":"
o462 Naturalization Application
o465 Other Immigration
Actions
V. ORIGIN (Place an "X" inane Box Only)
)8{ I Original 0 2 Removed from
Proceeding State COUIt
o 3 Remanded from
Appellate COUIt
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do1I0tcitejurisdictional statutesunless diversity):
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION t-1_ 5_ U_ ._ S_ .C_ . -,,-_ 1_ 05_ 1_ e_ t_ s_ eq~. _
Brief description of cause:
Trademark Infringement
VII. REQUESTED IN
COMPLAINT:
o CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION
UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.
DEMAND $ CHECK Y ES only if demanded incomplaint:
J URY DEMAND: )!:I Y es 0 No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
IFANY
(See instructions):
J UDGE
Hon. R.H. Kyle & Hon. P.J . Schiltz
"' ,._ _ _ - - _ _ .
DOCKET NUMBER 14-cv-3119 & 14-cv-3122
DATE
08/08/2014
SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
s/D avid D avenport
RECEIPT # MAG. J UDGE
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
AMOUNT APPLY ING IFP J UDGE
CASE 0:14-cv-03128 Document 1-1 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 1