Blake Lawsuit

Case 2:19-cv-11638-GCS-APP ECF No. 1 filed 06/04/19 PageID.
1 Page 1 of 19
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
TRAFFIC JAM AND SNUG OF

MICHIGAN, INC., a Michigan
corporation,
Plaintiff,
BUTZEL LONG, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS
Case No.
v.
Hon.
BLAKE FARMS HARD APPLE
CIDER, LLC, a Michigan limited
liability company,
Defendant.
BUTZEL LONG PC
By: George Schooff (P45596)
Kaveh Kashef (P64443)
150 West Jefferson, Suite 100

Detroit, Michigan 48226
schooff@butzel.com
Telephone: (313) 225-7000
Fax: (313) 225-7080
Attorneys for Plaintiff
COMPLAINT AGAINST BLAKE FARMS HARD APPLE CIDER, LLC
Plaintiff TRAFFIC JAM AND SNUG OF MICHIGAN, INC., by its
attorneys, states its Complaint against Defendant BLAKE FARMS HARD
APPLE CIDER, LLC as follows:

Case 2:19-cv-11638-GCS-APP ECF No. 1 filed 06/04/19 PageID.2 Page 2 of 19
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is a civil action by Traffic Jam and Snug of Michigan, Inc.
(“Traffic Jam”) against Blake Farms Hard Apple Cider, LLC (“Blake
Farms”), seeking damages and injunctive relief as a result of Blake Farms’
violations of the Trademark Act of 1946, Pub. L. No. 79-489, 60 Stat. 431,
as amended (“Lanham Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051-1141n, and state law.
THE PARTIES
2. Plaintiff Traffic Jam is a Michigan corporation having a place of
business at 511 W. Canfield at Second Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 48201.
3. Defendant Blake Farms is a Michigan limited liability company
having a place of business at 17985 Armada Center Road, Armada,
Michigan, 48005.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case under
section 39 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1121(a), and under 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1331 and 1338. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the
related state and common law claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1338 and 1367.
5. Blake Farms is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District
because Blake Farms resides in and does business here.
2
6. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1),
(b)(2) and (d).
RELEVANT FACTS
7. In 1965, Traffic Jam first opened its doors in Midtown Detroit.
8. Traffic Jam was featured in an August 16, 1970 Detroit Sunday

News article, shown below:
9. When Traffic Jam opened for business, Detroit was 20 years
into a city-to-suburb exodus, and the 1967 riots loomed just two years
away.
10. Yet in the more than half-a-century since, Traffic Jam has not
just survived, it has flourished.
3
11. During the interim, Traffic Jam invested considerable time,
effort, and expense to develop its marks, including its TRAFFIC JAM
marks.
12. In the process, Traffic Jam has served as a cornerstone for
Midtown Detroit’s resurgence, predating by decades the appearance of

Midtown neighbors such as Shinola, Jolly Pumpkin, Third Man Records,
HopCat and Avalon.
13. By way of example, in 1982, Traffic Jam began making and
selling baked goods to its restaurant patrons and the public in association
with its TRAFFIC JAM marks.
14. Traffic Jam has continuously made and sold baked goods in
association with its TRAFFIC JAM marks ever since.
15. Below are two examples of TRAFFIC JAM bread Traffic Jam
makes and sells to the public:
4
16. Later, in 1988, Traffic Jam persuaded the U.S. Department of
Agriculture to grant it a license to make and sell dairy products.
17. Traffic Jam has continuously made and sold dairy products in
association with its TRAFFIC JAM marks ever since.
18. Below is one example of TRAFFIC JAM cheese Traffic Jam

makes and sells to the public:
19. Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM cheeses have received broad
public recognition and acclaim, including winning Grand Prizes in
consecutive years at the Michigan State Fair.
5
20. Then, in December of 1992 and on the heels of a decades-
long legal battle, Traffic Jam became Michigan’s first brewpub.
21. Since then, Traffic Jam has continuously made and sold
alcoholic beverages in association with its TRAFFIC JAM marks.
22. In 2014, for example, Traffic Jam began canning and selling
TRAFFIC JAM IPA beer to the public:
23. From 1965 through the present, more than 50 years before the
acts complained of herein, Traffic Jam has extensively and continuously
used its TRAFFIC JAM marks.
6
24. As a result of Traffic Jam’s efforts, Traffic Jam has earned an
excellent reputation among the public and extensive goodwill in its marks,
including its TRAFFIC JAM marks.
25. In fact, Traffic Jam was featured on national television in Food
Network’s Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives, starring Guy Fieri:

BLAKE FARMS’ UNLAWFUL ACTS
26. In deliberate and intentional disregard for Traffic Jam’s rights,
Blake Farms recently began using Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM mark in
commerce.
7
27. Specifically, Blake Farms is using Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM
mark in association with an alcoholic beverage it is offering for sale to the
public.
28. In the Blake Farms’ advertisement duplicated below, for
example, Blake Farms is making prominent use of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC

JAM mark:
29. On May 20, 2019, when Traffic Jam first learned of Blake
Farms’ unlawful activities, Traffic Jam sent Blake Farms a letter
demanding it cease and desist from using TRAFFIC JAM no later than
May 31, 2019. See Ex. A.
30. Blake Farms did not respond to Traffic Jams’ demands.
8
31. Blake Farms’ use of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM mark in the
manner described is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or to deceive
consumers as the affiliation, connection, or association of Blake Farms
with Traffic Jam.
manner described is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or to deceive
consumers as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Blake Farms’
goods, services, and commercial activities with Traffic Jam.
manner described is intended to trade off of the reputation and goodwill the
public has come to associate with Traffic Jam, including Traffic Jam’s
TRAFFIC JAM marks.
34. The likelihood of confusion, mistake, and deception resulting
from Blake Farms’ infringement of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks is
causing irreparable harm to the goodwill symbolized by the marks, and the
reputation for quality the marks embody.
35. On information and belief, Blake Farms knowingly, willfully,
intentionally, and maliciously adopted and used confusingly similar
imitations of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks.
9
COUNT I – FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION

15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)
36. Traffic Jam repeats and incorporates by reference the
allegations in the preceding paragraphs.
37. Blake Farms’ use of confusingly similar imitations of Traffic
Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks has caused and is likely to continue causing
confusion, deception, and mistake by creating the false and misleading
impression that Blake Farms goods, services, and commercial activities
are made, sold or distributed by Traffic Jam, or are affiliated, connected, or
associated with Traffic Jam, or have the sponsorship, endorsement, or
approval of Traffic Jam.
38. Blake Farms has made false representations, false
descriptions, and false designations of, on, or in connection with its goods,
services, and commercial activities, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
39. Blake Farms’ acts have caused and, unless enjoined by this
Court will continue to cause, a likelihood of confusion and deception of the
public, and injury to Traffic Jam’s goodwill and reputation as symbolized by
its TRAFFIC JAM marks, for which Traffic Jam has no adequate remedy at
law.
10
40. Blake Farms’ acts demonstrate an intentional, willful, and
malicious intent to trade on the goodwill associated with Traffic Jam and
Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks, to Traffic Jam’s irreparable harm.
41. Blake Farms’ acts caused and will continue causing
substantial injury to the public and to Traffic Jam, and Traffic Jam is
entitled to injunctive relief, and to recover Blake Farms’ profits, actual
damages, enhanced profits and damages, costs, and reasonable attorney
fees under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(a), 1116, and 1117.
COUNT II – FEDERAL TRADEMARK DILUTION

15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)
43. For more than a half-century, Traffic Jam has exclusively and
continuously promoted and used its TRAFFIC JAM marks in Detroit, in
Michigan, and throughout the United States.
44. Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks have become famous and
well-known symbols of Traffic Jam and its goods, services, and
commercial activities, long before Blake Farms began using TRAFFIC
JAM in commerce.
11
45. Blake Farms’ use of TRAFFIC JAM in commerce dilutes and
will likely continue diluting the distinctiveness of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC
JAM marks by, among other things, eroding the public’s exclusive
identification of the famous and distinctive TRAFFIC JAM marks with
Traffic Jam, tarnishing and degrading the positive associations and

prestigious connotations of the marks, and otherwise lessening the
capacity of the marks to identify and distinguish Traffic Jam’s goods,
services, and commercial activities from the goods, services, and
commercial activities of others.
malicious intent to trade on the goodwill associated with Traffic Jam’s
TRAFFIC JAM marks, and to cause dilution of the marks to Traffic Jam’s
irreparable harm.
47. Blake Farms has caused and will continue causing irreparable
harm to Traffic Jam’s goodwill and business reputation, and dilute the
distinctiveness and value of Traffic Jam’s famous and distinctive TRAFFIC
JAM marks, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
48. Traffic Jam is entitled to injunctive relief and to recover Blake
Farms’ profits, actual damages, enhanced profits and damages, and
reasonable attorney fees under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(c), 1116, and 1117.
12
COUNT III – TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR COMPETITION

COMMON LAW
Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks has caused, and will likely continue to cause,
impression that Blake Farms’ goods, services, and commercial activities
are made, sold, or distributed by Traffic Jam, or are associated or
connected with Traffic Jam, or have the sponsorship, endorsement, or
approval of Traffic Jam.
51. Blake Farms’ acts constitute common law trademark
infringement and unfair competition.
Court will continue to cause, a likelihood of confusion and deception of
members of the public, and injury to Traffic Jam’s goodwill and reputation
as symbolized by its TRAFFIC JAM marks, for which Traffic Jam has no
adequate remedy at law.
TRAFFIC JAM marks, to Traffic Jam’s irreparable harm.
13
54. Blake Farms’ acts caused and will continue causing substantial
injury to the public and to Traffic Jam, and Traffic Jam is entitled to
injunctive relief, to recover Blake Farms’ profits, actual damages,
enhanced profits and damages, costs, reasonable attorney fees, and
punitive damages under the common law.

COUNT IV – MICHIGAN CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

M.C.L.A. § 445.903
56. The Michigan Consumer Protection Act provides in relevant
part:
(1) Unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices

in the conduct of trade or commerce are unlawful and are defined as
follows:
(a) Causing a probability of confusion or misunderstanding as the

source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services;
….
(c) Representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval,

characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities that they do
not have or that a person has sponsorship, approval, status,
affiliation, or connection that he or she does not have;
M.C.L.A. § 445.903.
Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks caused and is likely to continue to cause,
14
impression that Blake Farms’ goods, services and commercial activities
are made, sold, or distributed by Traffic Jam, or are affiliated, connected,
or associated with Traffic Jam, or have the sponsorship, endorsement, or
approval of Traffic Jam, in violation of the Michigan Consumer Protection

Act.
58. Blake Farms has made false representations, false
descriptions, and false designations of, on, or in connection with its goods,
services, and commercial activities, in violation of the Michigan Consumer
Protection Act.
Court will continue to cause, a likelihood of confusion and deception of
members of the public, and injury to Traffic Jam’s goodwill and reputation
as symbolized by the its TRAFFIC JAM marks, for which Traffic Jam has
no adequate remedy at law.
TRAFFIC JAM marks, to Traffic Jam’s irreparable harm.
61. Blake Farms’ acts caused and will continue causing substantial
injury to the public and to Traffic Jam, and Traffic Jam is entitled to
15
injunctive relief, and to recover Blake Farms’ profits, actual damages,
enhanced profits and damages, costs, and reasonable attorney fees under
the Michigan Consumer Protection Act.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Traffic Jam prays that:

1. The Court enter judgment for Plaintiff Traffic Jam and against
Defendant Blake Farms on all Counts;
2. Blake Farms and all of its agents, officers, employees,
representatives, successors, assigns, attorneys, and all other persons
acting for, with, by, through or under authority from Blake Farms, or in
active concert or participation with Blake Farms, and each of them, be
preliminarily and permanently enjoined from:
a. advertising, marketing, promoting, offering for sale, distributing,

and selling goods, services, and engaging in any other
commercial activities using Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks;
b. using the TRAFFIC JAM marks, or any copy, reproduction,
colorable imitation, or simulation of the TRAFFIC JAM marks,
on or in connection with Blake Farms’ goods, services, and
commercial activities;
c. using any mark, name, logo, design, or source designation of

any kind on or in connection with Blake Farms’ goods,
services, or commercial activities that is a copy, reproduction,
colorable imitation, or simulation of, or confusingly similar to
any of Traffic Jam’s marks, trade dresses, names, or logos;
16
d. using any mark, name, logo, design, or source designation of

any kind on or in connection with Blake Farms’ goods, services
and commercial activities that is likely to cause confusion,
mistake, deception, or public misunderstanding that such
goods, services or commercial activities are produced or
provided by Traffic Jam, or are sponsored or authorized by
Traffic Jam, or are in any way connected or related to Traffic
Jam;
e. using any mark, name, logo, design, or source designation of
any kind on or in connection with Blake Farms’ goods,

services, or commercial activities that dilutes or is likely to
dilute the distinctiveness of Traffic Jam’s marks, trade dresses,
names, or logos; and
f. passing off, palming off, or assisting in passing off or palming
off Blake Farms’ goods, services, and commercial activities as
those of Traffic Jam, or otherwise continuing any and all acts
of unfair competition as alleged in this Complaint.
3. Blake Farms be ordered to cease offering for sale, marketing,
promoting, and selling, and to recall all goods bearing, TRAFFIC JAM, or
any other a confusingly similar imitation Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM
marks, that are in Blake Farms’ possession, or have been shipped by
Blake Farms or under its authority, to any customer, including, but not
limited to, any wholesaler, distributor, retailer, consignor, or marketer, and
also to deliver to each such store or customer a copy of this Court’s order
as it relates to said injunctive relief against Blake Farms;
4. Blake Farms be ordered to deliver up for impoundment and
destruction, all goods, bags, boxes, labels, tags, signs, packages,
receptacles, advertising, sample books, promotional materials, stationery,
17
or other materials in the possession, custody or under the control of Blake
Farms that are found to adopt, infringe, or dilute any of Traffic Jam’s
TRAFFIC JAM marks, or that otherwise unfairly compete with Traffic Jam
and its goods, services, and commercial activities;
5. Blake Farms be compelled to account to Traffic Jam for any

and all profits derived by Blake Farms from the sale or distribution of
goods, services, and commercial activities resulting from the acts forming
the basis of this Complaint;
6. Traffic Jam be awarded its damages for the acts forming the
basis for this Complaint;
7. Based on Blake Farms’ knowing and intentional use of
confusingly similar imitations of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks,
trebling the damages and profits awarded as provided for by 15 U.S.C. §
1117(a);
8. Blake Farms be required to pay Traffic Jam its costs and
reasonable attorney fees incurred in this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §
1117(a), and applicable state law;
9. Based on Blake Farms’ willful and deliberate infringement
and/or dilution of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM marks, and to deter such
conduct in the future, Traffic Jam be awarded punitive damages;
18
10. Traffic Jam be awarded prejudgment and post-judgement
interest on all monetary awards; and
11. Traffic Jam be awarded such other relief as the Court deems
just and proper.

JURY TRAIL DEMANDED
Traffic Jam respectfully demands a trial by jury on all claims and
issues so triable.
DATED: June __, 2019 BUTZEL LONG PC
By:
George T. Schooff (P45596)
schooff@butzel.com
Telephone: (313) 225-7000
Fax: (313) 225-7080
19
Case 2:19-cv-11638-GCS-APP ECF No. 1-1 filed 06/04/19 PageID.20 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
TRAFFIC JAM AND SNUG OF

MICHIGAN, INC., a Michigan
corporation,
Plaintiff,
Case No.
v.
Hon.
BLAKE FARMS HARD APPLE
CIDER, LLC, a Michigan limited
liability company,
Defendant.
BUTZEL LONG PC
By: George Schooff (P45596)

schooff@butzel.com
Telephone: (313) 225-7000
Fax: (313) 225-7080
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit A – Cease and Desist Letter to Blake Farms Hard Apple Cider
EXHIBIT A
BUTZEL LONG
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS
a professional corporation
George T. Schooff
313 225 5310
schooff@butzel.com
Suite 100 150 West Jefferson

T: 313 225 7000 F: 313 225 7080
butzel.com
May 20, 2019
VIA FEDEX
Mr. Andrew Blake

Blake Farms Hard Apple Cider, LLC
DBA Blake's Brewing Co.
17985 Armada Center Road
Armada, MI 48005
Re: Traffic Jam and Snuq, Inc. v. Blake Farms Hard Cider, LLC
Dear Mr. Blake,
Our firm represents Traffic Jam and Snug, Inc. ("Traffic Jam") in intellectual
property matters.
As you know, Traffic Jam is one of Detroit and the tri-county area's best-known
and successful restaurants and breweries (see, e.g., <www.trafficjamdetroit.com>). To
that end, Traffic Jam has been providing goods and services to the public under its
TRAFFIC JAM family of marks since no later than 1965.
By way of example, Traffic Jam markets and sells alcoholic beverages to the
public under its TRAFFIC JAM marks. Enclosed for your reference is one example. As
is readily apparent to even to the most casual of consumers, Traffic Jam has been and
is making prominent use of its TRAFFIC JAM marks in this product category.
Traffic Jam has invested considerable time, effort and expense in developing its
family of marks, including its TRAFFIC JAM marks. As a result, Traffic Jam has earned
an excellent reputation among the public, along with substantial goodwill in its marks.
We have learned Blake Farms Hard Apple Cider, LLC ("Blake Farms") has
introduced and is using in commerce my client's TRAFFIC JAM mark in association with
an alcoholic beverage. Our investigation has further revealed Blake Farms has applied
to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to federally register our client's TRAFFIC JAM
mark in International Class 33 (alcoholic beverages), asserting an April 29, 2019 first-
use-in-commerce date. Enclosed is the specimen you submitted along with the
application.
Ann Arbor Bloomfield Hills Detroit Lansing New York Washington D.C.
Alliance Offices Beijing Shanghai Mexico City Monterrey Member Lex Mundt www.butzel.com
999999999\500K\1837349.v I
May 20, 2019
Blake Farms' use of TRAFFIC JAM is, at a minimum, confusingly similar to my

client's TRAFFIC JAM marks. And given your geographic proximity to my client, it would
strain credulity to suggest Blake Farms' adoption and use of TRAFFIC JAM — a mark
identical to my clients — wasn't undertaken with the intention of benefiting from my
client's reputation and good will, as embodied in its marks. As such, Blake Farms' use
of my clients TRAFFIC JAM marks constitutes trademark infringement, trademark
dilution, tarnishment, unfair competition, false designation of source and origin, false
advertising, as well as several other categories of wrongful behavior that are actionable
under federal and state law.
Traffic Jam's remedies for Blake Farms' violations of the law are severe. In cases
like this one, they can include awarding compensatory damages, a recovery of Blake
Farms' profits, treble damages, attorney fees, prejudgment interest, costs, an injunction
prohibiting you from continuing to use TRAFFIC JAM and any other confusingly similar
mark under penalty of contempt, and an order for destruction of all articles bearing my
client's TRAFFIC JAM marks. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. §§ 1116, 1117, 1118 and 1125.
Accordingly, we insist you (a) cease and desist from all uses of TRAFFIC JAM
and any confusingly similar mark no later than May 31, 2019,(b) confirm in writing that
you have ceased all such uses and will not in the future use TRAFFIC JAM or any
confusingly similar mark, and (c) provide your sales revenues for all goods and services
you provided in association with my client's TRAFFIC JAM mark.
If you have counsel, please send him or her a copy of this letter as soon as
possible, and ask him or her to contact me at their earliest convenience.
Litigation is both time-consuming and expensive. We hope it isn't necessary. We

look forward to hearing from you or your counsel soon to confirm you will meet our
demands.
Very r ly yo
N
rn
GORGE T. SCHOOF r-
utzel Long PC
GTS r-
Enclosures O
cc: Kaveh Kashef, Esq.
G)
page 2
999999999\50010,1837349.v!
tuuJZS =11169H )u!id
Id
Page 4 of 5
on3
E 1.41118010. n Icalla 70 1114 SUPG604 GOSPAL
icr
VENN SHOULD HOTIMICMCONOLIC BeitItiala WARM PcilLGAJ,I.,,h1P,
OCCAUli MCINK OP 1111111110011GT4 19 COPOLNPTION OF
NLQaAM emeuatnewnslowAsury TO CONE ACM on
CPCRATI WAINER(MD WSCAUSE WAIN PROCIDAS
PageID.24
0-e•O
Case 2:19-cv-11638-GCS-APP ECF No. 1-2 filed 06/04/19
E
E
Traffic Jam and Snug of Michigan, Inc. 14268 Second Ave. I Detroit, MI 45201
E
aasmaav baul.roan
.
,..04+••0•••••=
FROM OUR
BACKYARD
SINCE19461
STRAWBERRY, BLACKBERRY & RASPBERRY
CRAFTED ON OUR FARM

Blake Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Blake Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 2:19-cv-11638-GCS-APP ECF No. 1 filed 06/04/19 PageID.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

TRAFFIC JAM AND SNUG OF

150 West Jefferson, Suite 100

COMPLAINT AGAINST BLAKE FARMS HARD APPLE CIDER, LLC

Plaintiff TRAFFIC JAM AND SNUG OF MICHIGAN, INC., by its

attorneys, states its Complaint against Defendant BLAKE FARMS HARD

APPLE CIDER, LLC as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is a civil action by Traffic Jam and Snug of Michigan, Inc.

Farms”), seeking damages and injunctive relief as a result of Blake Farms’

as amended (“Lanham Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051-1141n, and state law.

2. Plaintiff Traffic Jam is a Michigan corporation having a place of

business at 511 W. Canfield at Second Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 48201.

3. Defendant Blake Farms is a Michigan limited liability company

having a place of business at 17985 Armada Center Road, Armada,

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

section 39 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1121(a), and under 28 U.S.C.

5. Blake Farms is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District

because Blake Farms resides in and does business here.

6. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1),

(b)(2) and (d).

7. In 1965, Traffic Jam first opened its doors in Midtown Detroit.

8. Traffic Jam was featured in an August 16, 1970 Detroit Sunday

News article, shown below:

9. When Traffic Jam opened for business, Detroit was 20 years

just survived, it has flourished.

11. During the interim, Traffic Jam invested considerable time,

12. In the process, Traffic Jam has served as a cornerstone for

Midtown Detroit’s resurgence, predating by decades the appearance of

Midtown neighbors such as Shinola, Jolly Pumpkin, Third Man Records,

HopCat and Avalon.

13. By way of example, in 1982, Traffic Jam began making and

with its TRAFFIC JAM marks.

association with its TRAFFIC JAM marks ever since.

makes and sells to the public:

16. Later, in 1988, Traffic Jam persuaded the U.S. Department of

Agriculture to grant it a license to make and sell dairy products.

association with its TRAFFIC JAM marks ever since.

18. Below is one example of TRAFFIC JAM cheese Traffic Jam

makes and sells to the public:

19. Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM cheeses have received broad

public recognition and acclaim, including winning Grand Prizes in

consecutive years at the Michigan State Fair.

20. Then, in December of 1992 and on the heels of a decades-

long legal battle, Traffic Jam became Michigan’s first brewpub.

alcoholic beverages in association with its TRAFFIC JAM marks.

TRAFFIC JAM IPA beer to the public:

acts complained of herein, Traffic Jam has extensively and continuously

used its TRAFFIC JAM marks.

24. As a result of Traffic Jam’s efforts, Traffic Jam has earned an

including its TRAFFIC JAM marks.

25. In fact, Traffic Jam was featured on national television in Food

Network’s Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives, starring Guy Fieri:

BLAKE FARMS’ UNLAWFUL ACTS

26. In deliberate and intentional disregard for Traffic Jam’s rights,

27. Specifically, Blake Farms is using Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC JAM

mark in association with an alcoholic beverage it is offering for sale to the

28. In the Blake Farms’ advertisement duplicated below, for

example, Blake Farms is making prominent use of Traffic Jam’s TRAFFIC

Farms’ unlawful activities, Traffic Jam sent Blake Farms a letter

May 31, 2019. See Ex. A.

30. Blake Farms did not respond to Traffic Jams’ demands.

manner described is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or to deceive