https___ecf.paed.uscourts.gov_cgi-bin_show_temp.pl_file=merged_0.0698642139706287_-1-1285715857

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

____________________________________ ) QVC, INC. ) 1200 Wilson Drive ) West Chester, PA 19380, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION v. ) ) NO.__________ VALUEVISION MEDIA, INC. ) d/b/a SHOPNBC ) 6740 Shady Oak Road ) Minneapolis, MN 55344, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________)

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, QVC, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, complains of defendant,

ValueVision Media d/b/a ShopNBC, as follows:

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff, QVC, Inc. (“Plaintiff”), is a corporation duly organized and existing

under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business located at 1200

Wilson Drive, West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380.

2. Defendant, ValueVision Media, Inc. d/b/a ShopNBC (“Defendant”), is a

corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota with its principal

place of business located at 6740 Shady Oak Road, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55344.

Case 2:10-cv-01927-MMB Document 1-1 Filed 04/29/10 of 26

2

3. At all times material hereto, Defendant acted by and through its agents,

employees, servants and representatives, actual or apparent, any and all of whom were acting, or

purporting to act, within the course and scope of their authority, agency duties and/or

employment.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under § 39 of the Federal Trademark

Act, 15 U.S.C. §1121 and 28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1338(a) and (b), and 1367(a). In addition, this

Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this civil action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a) in that

the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.00, exclusive of interests and

costs, and the matter is between citizens of different States.

5. At all times material, Defendant engaged in acts and/or omissions that it knew

would interfere, and in fact did interfere, with Plaintiff’s existing contractual relationships with

certain third parties, as described below, which Defendant knew would, and in fact did, cause

harm to Plaintiff in this judicial district.

6. Venue is proper in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§§1391(a) and (b) in that a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in this

judicial district.

SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS

Defendant’s Infringement Of Plaintiff’s Service Mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY

7. Plaintiff is a general merchandise electronic retailer that provides services in the

form of marketing, distributing and selling a wide variety of products through interstate

commerce directly to consumers throughout the United States by and through various means and


3

media, including, among other things, its merchandise-focused, direct response television

programming and the internet.

8. Continuously since at least 1987, Plaintiff has provided its above-described retail

home shopping services, in relevant part, under, and with the use of, the service mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY in connection with an annual mid-summer promotion of Christmas and

holiday products and gifts through, among other means, Plaintiff’s direct response television

programming and the internet.

9. The mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY is registered under Registration No.

3,697,422. Said registration is valid and subsisting, and the use of the mark has been continuous

since 1987.

10. Continuously since at least 1987 and long prior to the actions and/or omissions of

Defendant set forth below, Plaintiff’s retail services were, and are, widely advertised and

extensively offered throughout the United States under, and with the use of, the mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY.

11. Plaintiff’s direct response television programming, marketing and promoting

goods and products under, and with the use of, the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, is distributed

to no less than 90 million households throughout the United States.

12. The mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, through widespread and favorable public

acceptance and recognition, has become an asset of substantial value as a symbol of Plaintiff, its

quality goods and products, its services, and its goodwill. The mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY is

recognized by consumers throughout the United States as identifying services that have their

source, origin or sponsorship with Plaintiff.


4

13. Defendant also is a general merchandise electronic retailer that markets and

distributes a wide variety of products through interstate commerce directly to consumers by and

through various means and media, including, among other things, its merchandise-focused, direct

response television programming and the internet. Defendant also markets, distributes and sells

its merchandise by and through its internet website, www.shopnbc.com. Defendant is the third

largest direct response television programmer in the United States and its direct response

television programming is distributed to no less than 75 million households in the United States.

Defendant is a direct and principal competitor of Plaintiff.

14. Retail marketing through direct response television is highly competitive and

requires distinctive marketing strategies. Electronic retailers strive to distinguish their direct

response television programming from that of their competitors. To the extent that one

electronic retailer engages in the marketing of a distinctive product line and/or promotion

concept, there is little likelihood that another electronic retailer contemporaneously will be able

to successfully market and sell the same product line and/or promotion concept.

15. Successful retail marketing through direct response television is dependent upon a

presentation of the subject merchandise through an “on-air” direct response television program.

When Plaintiff identifies a product or product line and/or promotion concept that it wishes to

promote and market, it devotes substantial resources to developing the brand-value of such

product or product line and/or promotion concept in order to maximize consumer response to

“on-air” exposure of the product and/or promotion concept.

16. Successful retail marketing through direct response television also is dependant

upon a presentation of the subject merchandise through an “on-air” spokesperson with a

connection to such merchandise. The brand value, and thus the selling strength, of such


5

spokespersons is greatly enhanced by virtue of their exposure on Plaintiff’s direct response

television programming. Consequently, when Plaintiff identifies a product spokesperson that it

wishes to promote, it devotes substantial resources to developing the brand-name and persona of

that individual.

17. Keith Stewart (“Stewart”) is the Chief Executive Officer of Defendant. Stewart is

a former officer of Plaintiff and, as such, had access to confidential aspects of Plaintiff’s business

operations, contracts, marketing strategies and other trade secrets. Stewart still owes continuing

contractual and common law duties of confidentiality to Plaintiff.

18. Defendant has engaged Darlene Daggett (“Daggett”), a former executive officer

of Plaintiff and, at one time, the individual in charge of Plaintiff’s entire U.S. commerce

operations, as a “consultant” to Defendant. As a former officer of Plaintiff, Daggett had access

to confidential aspects of Plaintiff’s business operations, contracts, marketing strategies and

other trade secrets. Daggett still owes continuing contractual and common law duties of

confidentiality to Plaintiff.

19. The Chairman of Defendant’s Board of Directors is Randy S. Ronning

(“Ronning”). Ronning is a former executive officer of Plaintiff and, as such, had access to

confidential aspects of Plaintiff’s business operations, contracts, marketing strategies and other

trade secrets. Ronning still owes continuing contractual and common law duties of

confidentiality to Plaintiff.

20. Stewart, Daggett and Ronning all had, and have, particular knowledge as to the

value of the CHRISTMAS IN JULY mark to Plaintiff and the importance of its use in

Plaintiff’s marketing strategies.


6

21. Stewart, Daggett and Ronning all had, and have, particular knowledge as to the

various contracts and agreements between Plaintiff and the vendors of goods and products to

Plaintiff.

22. During an earnings teleconference call conducted by Defendant on or about May

20, 2009, Stewart, speaking as the Chief Executive Officer of Defendant, stated “Examples of

upcoming events include our Founder’s Day in June featuring the best of ShopNBC. Christmas

in July featuring Mr. Thomas Pekoni [sic] to mention a few.” Plaintiff’s mark CHRISTMAS IN

JULY has been used by Plaintiff in connection with the marketing, distributing and sale of

various holiday products and gifts, including products and gifts associated with the Christmas

holidays, with Thomas J. Pacconi, Sr. (“Pacconi”) as a spokesperson since at least 1998 and is

associated with the marketing, distributing and sale of such products by and through Plaintiff’s

direct response television programming.

23. On July 22, 2009, Plaintiff directly informed Defendant that its contemplated

unauthorized use of Plaintiff’s mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY in connection with a mid-summer

promotion of Christmas and holiday products and gifts by and through Defendant’s retail home

shopping services was in violation of Plaintiff’s rights and interests in such mark. Plaintiff

directed that Defendant was to refrain from such use of the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY or

risk legal action. Defendant ignored Plaintiff’s demands.

24. Long after Plaintiff established its rights in the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY,

and notwithstanding such well-known and prior rights in the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, but

rather with full knowledge of such rights, Defendant adopted and used such mark on or about

July 24 and 25, 2009 for its direct response television programming and home shopping retail

services offered in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and in interstate commence.


7

25. The designations CHRISTMAS IN JULY as used by Plaintiff and Defendant,

are identical in sound, appearance and meaning.

26. Notwithstanding Plaintiff’s request to Defendant to cease and desist from acts of

infringement with respect to the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, Defendant adopted and used the

mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY in connection with a mid-summer promotion of Christmas and

holiday products and gifts by and through Defendant’s retail home shopping services.

27. The home shopping retail services offered by Plaintiff and Defendant,

respectively, are substantially identical and move through similar channels of interstate

commerce to similar classes of consumers, and Plaintiff and Defendant are in competition with

respect to such home shopping retail services.

28. Defendant’s use of the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY is likely to cause, and has

and will cause, confusion, mistake and deception as to the source, origin, sponsorship and/or

approval of the home shopping retail services that are provided by Defendant under the mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY.

29. Defendant had actual knowledge, including, without limitation, knowledge

acquired through Stewart, Daggett and Ronning, of Plaintiff’s prior use of the mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY when Defendant began using the identical mark.

30. Defendant has long known, including, without limitation, as a result of knowledge

acquired through Stewart, Daggett and Ronning, of the fact that the general public associates the

mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY with Plaintiff’s goods and services.

31. Defendant has sought, and is seeking, to capitalize upon the goodwill engendered

by the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY by adopting the identical mark for identical services.


8

32. Defendant performed the above described actions willfully, and with knowledge

of the infringement that they would cause, and with the intention to appropriate and unfairly

trade upon the goodwill in the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY.

Defendant’s Intentional Interference With Plaintiff’s Contractual Relationships

33. Defendant, in part with the use of information and knowledge obtained from

Stewart, Daggett and Ronning, has engaged, and continues to engage, in a concerted, purposeful

and deliberate scheme to disrupt, interfere and harm existing or prospective contractual

relationships between Plaintiff and third parties, including vendors and licensors to Plaintiff.

34. Among the contractual relationships targeted by Defendant was, and is, Plaintiff’s

existing contracting relationships with Pacconi, through John Thomas Investments, Inc. (“JTI”)

35. Pacconi, through JTI and previously through Thomas Pacconi Classics, Inc.

(“TPC”), the predecessor-in-interest to JTI, as well as now through an entity known as 8011 On

The Bridge, Inc., which is a mere continuation and/or alter ego of JTI, was and is in the business

of marketing, distributing and selling, among other things, a variety of holiday, home décor,

furniture, decorative, ornamental and/or seasonal consumer products, some or all of which were

marketed and sold under the trademark and trade name of “Thomas Pacconi Classics.” The

trademark and trade name, “Thomas Pacconi Classics” was owned by TPC until on or about

December 31, 2005. At that time, TPC assigned its entire interest in the trademark and trade

name “Thomas Pacconi Classics” to JTI, which is the current registered owner. Such assignment

was subject and subordinate to the rights and licenses previously granted to Plaintiff by TPC in

such trademark and trade name, as described below.


9

The Agreement with TPC and Pacconi

36. QVC entered into a license agreement (the “Agreement”) with TPC and Pacconi,

dated as of June 12, 1998, pursuant to which TPC, among other things, grants Plaintiff and its

affiliates the exclusive worldwide right to promote, market, sell and distribute, through all means

and media, including, but not limited to, “Direct Response Television,” various reproduction

wood home décor products manufactured, developed or sold by TPC, whether in existence at the

time of execution and delivery of the Agreement or later developed (collectively, “Products”) for

the term of the Agreement. “Direct Response Television” is defined in the Agreement to mean:

any electronic transmission (whether now in existence or developed hereafter) through which a consumer is requested to purchase any product by mail, telephone, or other electronic means, including without limitation, televised electronic retailing programs, infomercials, direct response commercial spots and computerized shopping services, whether on-line services or otherwise.

37. The Agreement further grants to Plaintiff and its affiliates the exclusive right to

use, publish, reproduce and transmit the trademarks, trade names, and/or logos used and/or

developed by TPC in connection with the Products, including, without limitation, the phrase

“Thomas Pacconi Classics” (whether now in existence or created hereafter, collectively, the

“Trademarks”) to Promote the Products in accordance with the terms of the Agreement.

38. The Agreement provides that Pacconi shall appear as a spokesperson on

Plaintiff’s Direct Response Television programs for purposes of marketing and promoting the

Products.

39. The Agreement also grants to Plaintiff the exclusive worldwide right to use

Pacconi’s name, likeness, image, voice and performance to market, promote and sell the

Products through all means and media throughout the term of the Agreement.


10

40. The exclusive licenses and other rights granted to Plaintiff under the Agreement

are in full force and effect until at least December 12, 2010 (the “Term”), subject to further

renewals of the Term pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement.

41. The Agreement imposes certain “non-compete” obligations upon TPC and

Pacconi as follows:

Non-Compete. Except as contemplated hereunder and without the prior written consent of [Plaintiff], neither [TPC] nor [Pacconi] shall, during the Term of this Agreement, and during the [six month] period following the expiration or termination of this Agreement, promote, advertise, endorse or sell any goods, services, or products, including, without limitation, the Products, anywhere in the world via Direct Response Television.

42. Pursuant to the Agreement, and in accordance with a subsequent amendment

referenced below, the “non-compete” obligations of TPC and Pacconi under the Agreement are

in full force and effect until six months after the termination or expiration of the Term of the

Agreement, i.e., until at least June 12, 2011, subject to further renewals of the Term of the

Agreement pursuant to the provisions thereof.

The Amendment to the Agreement with TPC and Pacconi

43. QVC and TPC entered into an amendment (the “Amendment”) to the Agreement

as of January 16, 2003. The Amendment grants Plaintiff and its affiliates exclusive rights and

licenses with respect to certain additional consumer goods and products:

[TPC] manufactures and Plaintiff desires to Promote various products including, without limitation, Christmas ornaments, home décor, gift wrap, garden décor, furniture, electronics and other mutually agreed upon products irrespective of whether the same bear, are marketed in connection with and/or otherwise associated with the Trademarks (as defined below) (hereinafter, all such products including, without limitation, Christmas ornaments, home décor, gift wrap, garden décor, furniture, electronics and other mutually agreed upon products irrespective of whether the same bear, are marketed in connection with and/or otherwise


11

associated with the Trademarks (as defined below), are collectively referred to as the “Holiday Products.”

44. Pursuant to the Amendment, in pertinent part, TPC granted to Plaintiff and its

affiliates throughout the Term of the Agreement (a) the exclusive worldwide right to Promote the

Holiday Products by Direct Response Television (as defined in the Agreement); (b) the non-

exclusive worldwide right to Promote the Holiday Products by all means and media other than

Direct Response Television; and (c) the right to use, publish, reproduce, and transmit the

Trademarks, including, without limitation, the phrase “Thomas Pacconi Classics,” in connection

with the Holiday Products, and to Promote the Holiday Products.

45. The Amendment further provides that TPC may not Promote products other than

the Products and/or the Holiday Products by or through any internet sites of, or linked to, or

otherwise affiliated with, any “Direct Competitor” of QVC. Defendant is a “Direct Competitor”

within the meaning and scope of the Amendment. (The Agreement and the Amendment

hereinafter are referred to collectively as the “Agreement,” unless stated otherwise.)

The Assignment of The Agreement With TPC and Pacconi, as Amended, To JTI

46. Plaintiff, TPC, and JTI entered into an Assignment and Assumption Agreement

(the “Assumption Agreement”), dated as of March 6, 2006, pursuant to which, in relevant part,

all of TPC’s interests in, and obligations under, the Agreement were assigned by TPC to JTI and,

in turn, were assumed by JTI, but without release of TPC. Pacconi’s obligations and duties

under the Agreement remain in full force and effect following execution of the Assumption

Agreement.

47. The Assumption Agreement was executed on behalf of Plaintiff by Stewart, then

an officer of Plaintiff.


12

48. Pursuant to the Assumption Agreement, the licenses and other rights granted to

Plaintiff by the Agreement, and the corresponding obligations of JTI and Pacconi thereunder, are

in full force and effect throughout the remaining Term of the Agreement.

49. Pursuant to the Assumption Agreement, the “non-compete” obligations of JTI and

Pacconi under the Agreement are in full force and effect throughout the Term of the Agreement,

and for such additional period of time following expiration or termination of the Agreement as

may be applicable.

The Letter Agreement with JTI

50. On or about August 23, 2007, Plaintiff entered into a letter agreement (the “Letter

Agreement”) with JTI and Pacconi. The Letter Agreement, among other things, grants to

Plaintiff and its affiliates, for the term of the Letter Agreement:

(i) the exclusive worldwide right to Promote [the Thomas Pacconi Charging Station and Organization, the Thomas Pacconi Tabletop Interchangeable Game Chest and the Thomas Pacconi Playing Card Holder with 2 Decks of Cards and 5 Dice (collectively, the “Letter Agreement Products”)] through all means and media, now known or hereafter developed; [and] (ii) the right to use, publish, reproduce and transmit the trademarks, trade names, service marks, trade dress, copyrights, designs, logos and/or other intellectual property rights owned, used, license and/or developed by [JTI] in connection with the [Letter Agreement Products] (whether now in existence or created hereafter, collectively the “IP Rights”) to Promote the [Letter Agreement Products] in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Letter Agreement and the right to sublicense to others the aforementioned rights[.] 51. The Letter Agreement is in full force and effect until at least August 23, 2010 (the

“Letter Agreement Term”), subject to further renewals pursuant to the provisions of the Letter

Agreement. For the duration of the Letter Agreement Term, the Letter Agreement Products may

not be promoted, marketed, sold and/or distributed to customers anywhere in the world through


13

any means or media whatsoever, including direct response television programming and the

internet, except as may be done by Plaintiff and/or its affiliates.

52. The Letter Agreement, among other things, imposes the following “non-compete”

obligations on JTI, and Pacconi as Spokesperson:

JTI and [Pacconi] agree that during the Term and for one (1) year thereafter, neither JTI nor [Pacconi] shall, without the express written consent of QVC, Promote or cause a third party to Promote (i) the [Letter Agreement Products] anywhere via any means or media; and/or (ii) any products, including, without limitation, the [Letter Agreement Products] anywhere via Direct Response Television Programs.

53. Pursuant to the Letter Agreement, the “non-compete” obligations of JTI and

Pacconi remain in full force and effect until one year after the termination or expiration of the

Letter Agreement Term, i.e., until at least August 23, 2011, subject to further renewals of the

Letter Agreement Term pursuant to the provisions of the Letter Agreement.

Plaintiff’s Development of the Thomas Pacconi Classics Brand and Pacconi’s Persona

54. From 1998 through the present date, and in reliance upon its exclusive rights and

the covenants and representations of Pacconi, TPC and JTI under the Agreement and the Letter

Agreement, Plaintiff purchased and acquired no less than $155,760,113.60 in consumer products

(including but not limited to the Products, the Holiday Products and the Letter Agreement

Products) from JTI (and its predecessor in interest, TPC) for marketing, promotion, distribution

and sale to Plaintiff’s retail customers through, among other means, Plaintiff’s direct response

television programming and the internet.

55. From a date on or about June 1998 through the present date, Plaintiff has devoted

substantial resources to market, promote and develop the brand name and value of JTI’s

(formerly TPC’s) consumer products, including, without limitation, the Products, the Letter


14

Agreement Products and the Holiday Products, and the value of the trademark or trade name,

“Thomas Pacconi Classics”. In doing so, Plaintiff has relied on the exclusive licenses and rights

granted to Plaintiff under the Agreement and the Letter Agreement.

56. From a date in or about June 1998 through the present date, Plaintiff devoted

substantial resources to developing the brand-name and persona of Pacconi as the spokesperson

for the consumer products of JTI and TPC. In doing so, Plaintiff relied upon the exclusive

licenses and rights granted to Plaintiff under the Agreement and the Letter Agreement.

Defendant’s Interference with Defendant’s Contracts by and Through Defendant’s 2009 Christmas In July Programming

57. Sometime in 2008, unbeknownst to Plaintiff, Defendant commenced discussions

with Pacconi and JTI (either directly or indirectly through Pacconi’s son, Thomas J. Pacconi, Jr.,

and/or an entity known as 8011 On The Bridge, Inc., an alter ego and/or mere continuation of

JTI, owned and managed directly or indirectly by Pacconi and Thomas J. Pacconi, Jr.) to

purchase and acquire Products, the Holiday Products and the Letter Agreement Products, as well

as other goods and merchandise, for subsequent promotion, marketing, distribution and sale by

Defendant, with the appearance of Pacconi as a spokesperson, by and through Defendant’s direct

response television programming and Defendant’s related internet website, www. shopnbc.com,

all in violation of the exclusive licenses and other rights granted to Plaintiff and in violation of

the “non-compete” obligations owed to Plaintiff under the Agreement and/or the Letter

Agreement.

58. At all times material hereto, Defendant, by and through, among other means,

Stewart, Ronning and Daggett, had full knowledge of Plaintiff’s contracts and agreements with

Pacconi and JTI, as well as Plaintiff’s rights and licenses thereunder. In addition, on July 22,


15

2009, Plaintiff directly informed Defendant of Plaintiff’s existing contracts and agreements with

Pacconi and JTI, as well as Plaintiff’s rights and licenses thereunder, and demanded that

Defendant refrain from any actions that would violate and interfere with Plaintiff’s rights and

interests. Defendant ignored Plaintiff’s demands.

59. Pacconi was scheduled to appear on Plaintiff’s direct response television

programming on Saturday, July 25, 2009 in conjunction with Plaintiff’s 2009 “Christmas in

July” event for the purpose of promoting, marketing, distributing and selling Holiday Products

previously purchased from JTI. Plaintiff had, and has, a substantial inventory of Holiday

Products previously purchased from JTI.

60. Although scheduled to appear on Plaintiff’s direct response television

programming in connection with Plaintiff’s “Christmas in July” event, Pacconi failed or refused

to respond to communications from Plaintiff regarding the scheduled appearance on Saturday,

July 25, 2009.

61. Instead of appearing on Plaintiff’s “Christmas in July” direct response television

programming, Pacconi appeared on or about July 24, 2009, as a spokesperson on direct response

television programming produced by Defendant with the unauthorized use of Plaintiff’s mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY. Without Plaintiff’s consent or authorization, Defendant marketed,

promoted and sold a number of Holiday Products prominently using the trademark and trade

name “Thomas Pacconi Classics” for which Plaintiff had been granted exclusive rights as

described above. Plaintiff has done so, both with and without the use of Pacconi as a

spokesperson, on or about July 24, 2009 and thereafter.

62. The following Holiday Products for which Plaintiff holds the exclusive worldwide

license to promote, market, distribute and sell with the use of the trademark or trade name,


16

“Thomas Pacconi Classics,” are among the Holiday Products that were, are being, promoted,

marketed, distributed and sold by and through Defendant’s direct response television

programming and its related internet site, all in violation of Plaintiff’s rights and interests:

QVC Item # H0513 Shop NBC Item #K25348

Thomas Pacconi 60pc Mini Blown Glass Ornament Set

Thomas Pacconi Classics Mini Blown Glass Ornaments - Set of 60

QVC Item # H05737 Shop NBC Item # K25350

Thomas Pacconi Set of 10 Snowman Glass Ornaments

Thomas Pacconi Classics Snowmen 10-Piece Blown Glass Ornament Set

QVC Item # H11447

Shop NBC Item # K25343

Thomas Pacconi Set of 4 Blown Glass Peek-A-Boo Ornaments

Thomas Pacconi Classics Blown Glass Peek-A-Boo Ornaments - Set of 4


17

QVC Item # H12259 Shop NBC Item # K25336

Thomas Pacconi Flameless Candle w/Light Up Winter Scene

Thomas Pacconi Classics Musical Flameless Pillar Candle w/ LED Base

COUNT I – UNFAIR COMPETITION

63. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1

through 62 inclusive as if set forth fully at length herein.

64. Defendant’s use of the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, as described above,

infringes upon Plaintiff’s mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, and Plaintiff’s rights and interests

therein, under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and at common law.

65. Defendant had actual knowledge of Plaintiff’s prior use of the mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY when Defendant began using the confusingly similar mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY.

66. Defendant has long known of the fact that the public associates the mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY with Plaintiff’s goods and services and with Plaintiff’s annual mid-

summer retailing event. Defendant sought, and seeks, to capitalize on the goodwill engendered

by the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY by adopting the identical mark for identical services.

67. Defendant performed the above described actions willfully, and with knowledge

of the infringement that such actions would, and will, cause, and to appropriate and unfairly trade

upon the goodwill in the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY.


18

68. As a result of Defendant’s acts and omissions, as described above, Defendant has

and will enjoy profits to which it is not otherwise entitled.

69. By reason of Defendant’s acts and omissions, as described above, Plaintiff has

and will suffer irreparable damage to its business reputation and goodwill and will be irreparably

harmed through loss of the confidence and trust of its customers.

70. By reason of Defendant’s acts and omissions, as described above, Plaintiff has

suffered unascertainable present losses and incalculable future economic losses.

71. Unless permanently enjoined, Defendant will continue to infringe upon the mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY, thereby deceiving the public and causing QVC immediate and

irreparable harm.

72. The balancing of the equities favors the issuance of a permanent injunction

against Defendant.

73. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.

COUNT II- TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT



75. Plaintiff duly registered the service mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, as described

above, for home shopping services in the field of general merchandise by means of television,

telephone and the internet. A true and correct copy of Registration No. 3,697,422. is attached

hereto as Exhibit “A” and is made a part hereof.

76. Use by Defendant of the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY in the manner described

above infringes upon Plaintiff’s service mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY under § 32(1) of the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1).


19

77. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendant will continue to infringe the service

mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, thereby deceiving the public and causing Plaintiff immediate

and irreparable injury, as well as incalculable economic losses.


against Defendant.


COUNT I I I - TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT



81. Defendant’s acts and omissions, as described above, were done willfully and with

knowledge of the infringement that such actions and conduct would cause injury to Plaintiff, and

would appropriate and unfairly trade upon the goodwill in Plaintiff’s mark CHRISTMAS IN

JULY.

82. As a result of Defendant’s acts and omissions, as described above, Plaintiff has

sustained, and will sustain, injuries and damages to its business, reputation and goodwill.

COUNT IV – FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN



84. The confusingly similar designation CHRISTMAS IN JULY adopted and used

by Defendant in manner described above constitutes a false designation of origin with the

meaning of § 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), which is likely to cause confusion,

mistake or deception as to the source, origin, sponsorship and/or approval of the services that

were and are provided by Defendant under said designation.


20

85. The nature and probable tendency and effect of Defendant’s use of the

confusingly similar designation CHRISTMAS IN JULY in the manner described above was

and is to enable Defendant to confuse or deceive the public by misrepresenting the services

offered under said designation as sponsored, licensed and/or otherwise approved by, or are in

some way connected or affiliated with, Plaintiff. Such conduct constitutes a false designation of

origin with the meaning of § 43 of the Federal Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

COUNT V – UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER PENNSYLVANIA COMMON LAW


through 73 inclusive and paragraphs 78 and 79 as if set forth fully at length herein.

87. As a result of Defendant’s acts and omissions, as described above, Defendant has

engaged in conduct which is contrary to honest, industrial and commercial practice, and,

therefore, Defendant has engaged in unfair competition in violation of the laws of the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

88. Defendant’s conduct, as described above, were and are calculated to procure an

unfair competitive advantage by misappropriating the valuable goodwill developed by Plaintiff

at substantial effort and expense and represented by the distinctiveness of the mark

CHRISTMAS IN JULY, and by misrepresenting the nature, characteristics, qualities and origin

of Defendant’s business activities and services.

89. Plaintiff has suffered unascertainable present losses and incalculable future

economic losses as a result of Defendant’s continuing conduct of unfair competition, as

described above.


21

90. As a result of Defendant’s continuing conduct of unfair competition, Defendant

has and will enjoy profits to which it is not otherwise entitled.

91. By reason of Defendant’s conduct, as described above, Plaintiff has and will

suffer irreparable damage to its business reputation and goodwill and will be irreparably harmed

through loss of the confidence and trust of its customers.

92. Unless permanently enjoined, Defendant will continue to compete unfairly, as

described above, thereby deceiving the public and causing QVC immediate and irreparable harm.


against Defendant.


COUNT VI – UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER PENNSYLVANIA COMMON LAW


through 68 inclusive, paragraphs 75 and 76 inclusive, paragraphs 81 and 82 inclusive and

paragraph 84 as if set forth fully at length herein.

96. Plaintiff has sustained, and will sustain, injuries and damages as a result of

Defendant’s conduct of unfair competition as described above in an amount in excess of

$150,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs.

97. The conduct of Defendant, as described above, was deliberate, malicious, wanton

and outrageous, entitling Plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

COUNT VI I - INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS




22

99. Defendant has engaged, and continues to engage, in a concerted, purposeful and

deliberate scheme to disrupt, interfere and harm existing and/or prospective contractual

relationships between Plaintiff, on the one hand, and Pacconi and JTI, on the other hand.

100. Defendant had full knowledge of the Agreement and Letter Agreement, as well as

Plaintiff’s rights and licenses thereunder. Notwithstanding such knowledge and information,

Defendant deliberately interfered with Plaintiff’s existing contractual relationships with JTI and

Pacconi under the Agreement and the Letter Agreement by, among other things, promotion,

marketing, sale and distribution of Products, Holiday Products and/or Letter Agreement

Products, with the use of the trademark and trade name, “Thomas Pacconi Classics”, through

Defendant’s direct response television programming and internet website with the services of

Pacconi as a spokesperson, all with the further knowledge and intent that such interference

would cause harm to Plaintiff, all as described above.

101. Defendant acted for its own financial gain and with the intent to deprive Plaintiff

of its rights and benefits under the Agreement and the Letter Agreement.

102. The interference by Defendant in Plaintiff’s existing contractual relationships

with Pacconi and JTI, as described above, was neither privileged nor justified.

103. The conduct of Defendant, as described above, proximately caused, and continues

to cause, actual damages to Plaintiff, including lost sales and profits, in an amount as yet not

fully determined but, in any event, in excess of $150,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs.

Such damages, among other things, include Plaintiff’s lost profits and sales arising from the sale

of those Products, Holiday Products and/or Letter Agreement Products (including Plaintiff’s

existing inventory of the same) with respect to which Plaintiff holds exclusive rights and

licenses, and the future lost profits and sales with respect to such merchandise.


23

104. The conduct of Defendant, as described above, was deliberate, malicious, wanton

and outrageous, entitling Plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

RELIEF SOUGHT

WHEREFORE, plaintiff, QVC, Inc., prays that:

1. This Court enter judgment in favor of plaintiff, QVC, Inc., and against defendant,

ValueVision Media, Inc., that:

(a) defendant has infringed the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY under §§

32(a) and 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1) and 1125(a), and at

common law;

(b) defendant has violated § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)

by making false designations of origin; and

(c) defendant has engaged in unfair competition.

2. This Court permanently enjoin defendant, ValueVision Media, Inc., and its

agents, employees, servants, representatives, successors and assigns, and all others in privity or

acting in concert therewith, be permanently enjoined from:

(a) using the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY and/or any other trade name,

trademark, service mark, corporate or other commercial designation that is

confusingly similar to the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY;

(b) from otherwise infringing plaintiff’s mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY;

and

(c) unfairly competing with plaintiff in any manner whatsoever or otherwise

injuring plaintiff’s business reputation in the manner complained of herein.


24

3. This Court direct defendant, ValueVision Media, Inc., pursuant to § 36 of the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1118, to deliver up for destruction or other disposition by plaintiff all

labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles and advertisements in defendant’s

possession that bear or are labeled with the designation CHRISTMAS IN JULY, or any

reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation of the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY, and

all plates, molds, matrices and other means of making or duplicating the same.


ValueVision Media, Inc., awarding plaintiff compensatory damages pursuant to § 35(a) of the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), in an amount to be determined at trial for the damages

sustained by plaintiff as a result of defendant’s acts and omissions or the profits earned by

defendant, whichever is greater, and further entering such judgment for three times such profits

or damages, whichever is greater.

5. This Court require defendant, ValueVision Media, Inc., pursuant to § 35(a) of the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), to account for, and disgorge to plaintiff, all profits realized

from defendant’s infringing use of the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY and/or any other trade

name, trademark, service mark, corporate or other commercial designation that is confusingly

similar to the mark CHRISTMAS IN JULY.

6. This Court require defendant, pursuant to § 35(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §

1117(a), to pay to plaintiff the costs of this action and all reasonable attorneys’ fees and

expenses incurred by plaintiff.


ValueVision Media, Inc., awarding plaintiff compensatory damages in an amount to be


25

determined at trial but in excess of $150,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, on account

defendant’s acts of unfair competition complained of herein.


ValueVision Media, Inc., awarding plaintiff compensatory damages in an amount to be

determined at trial but in excess of $150,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, on account

defendant’s interference with plaintiff’s contractual relationships as complained of herein.

8. This Court enter awarding judgment in favor of plaintiff, QVC, Inc., and against

defendant, ValueVision Media, Inc., awarding plaintiff punitive damages in an amount to be

determined at trial as a result of defendant’s actions complained of herein.

9. This Court grant such other and further relief in favor of plaintiff, QVC, Inc., as

the Court deems just and equitable.

SAUL EWING LLP A Delaware Limited Liability Partnership By:_____________________________ Nathaniel Metz, Esquire Signature Validation No. NM264 (610) 251-5099 (610) 722-3271 (FAX) [email protected] David R. Moffitt, Esquire (610) 251-5758 (610) 251-1405 (FAX) [email protected] 1200 Liberty Ridge Drive, Suite 200 Wayne, PA 19087-5569 Attorneys for Plaintiff QVC, Inc.


26

OF COUNSEL: Sherry H. Flax, Esquire Saul Ewing LLP 500 E. Pratt St. Suite 900 Baltimore, MD 21202 (410) 332-8600 (410) 332.8785 (FAX) [email protected]


JS 44

(Rev. 07/86) CIVIL COVER SHEET The JS-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 the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)

I (a) PLAINTIFFS QVC, Inc. Studio Park 1200 Wilson Drive West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380-4267

DEFENDANTS VALUEVISION MEDIA, INC. d/b/a SHOPNBC 6740 Shady Oak Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344

(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF Chester .

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED DEFENDANT . (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED

(c) ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER)

Nathaniel Metz, Esquire Saul Ewing LLP 1200 Liberty Ridge Drive, Suite 200 Wayne, PA 19087-5569 (610) 251-5099

ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (PLACE AN [x] IN ONE BOX ONLY)

[ ] 1 U.S. Government [X] 3 Federal Question Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) [ ] 2 U.S. GOVERNMENT [ ] 4 Diversity Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (PLACE AN [x] IN ONE BOX (For Diversity Cases Only) FOR PLAINTIFF AND ONE BOX FOR DEFENDANT)

PTF DEF PTF DEF Citizen of This State [ ] 1 [ ] 1 Incorporated or Principal Place [ ] 4 [ ] 4 of Business in This State Citizen of Another State [ ] 2 [ ] 2 Incorporated and Principal Place [ ] 5 [ ] 5 of Business in Another State Citizen or Subject of a [ ] 3 [ ] 3 Foreign Nation [ ] 6 [ ] 6 Foreign Country

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (PLACE AN [x] IN ONE BOX ONLY)

CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES

[ ] 110Insurance [ ] 120Marine [ ] 130Miller Act [ ] 140Negotiable Instrument [ ] 150Recovery of Overpayment &

Enforcement of Judgment [ ] 151Medicare Act [ ] 152Recovery of Defaulted Student

Loans (Excl. Veterans) [ ] 153Recovery of Overpayment of

Veteran's Benefits [ ] 160Stockholders' Suits [ ] 190 Other Contract [ ] 195 Contract Product Liability REAL PROPERTY [ ] 210Land Condemnation [ ] 220Foreclosure [ ] 230Rent Lease & Ejectment [ ] 240Torts to Land [ ] 245Tort Product Liability [ ] 290All Other Real Property

PERSONAL INJURY [ ] 310Airplane [ ] 315Airplane Product Liability [ ] 320Assault, Libel & Slander [ ] 330Federal Employers'

Liability [ ] 340Marine [ ] 345Marine Product Liability [ ] 350Motor Vehicle [ ] 355Motor Vehicle Product

Liability [ ] 360Other Personal Injury CIVIL RIGHTS [ ] 441Voting [ ] 442Employment [ ] 443Housing/ Accommodations [ ] 444Welfare []] 440Other Civil Rights

PERSONAL INJURY [ ] 362Personal Injury- Med.

Malpractice [ ] 365Personal Injury- Product

Liability [ ] 368Asbestos Personal Injury

Product Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY [ ] 370Other Fraud [ ] 371Truth in Lending [ ] 380Other Personal Property

Damage [ ] 385Property Damage

Product Liability PRISONER PETITIONS [ ] 510Motions to Vacate

Sentence [ ] 530Habeas Corpus [ ] 540Mandamus & Other [ ] 550Civil Rights

[ ] 610Agriculture [ ] 620Food & Drug [ ] 630Liquor Laws [ ] 640R.R. & Truck [ ] 650Airline Reqs [ ] 660Occupational Safety/Health [ ] 690Other LABOR [ ] 710Fair Labor Standards Act [ ] 720Labor/Mgmt. Relations [ ] 730Labor/Mgmt. Reporting &

Disclosure Act [ ] 740Railway Labor Act [ ] 790Other Labor Litigation [ ] 791Empl. Ret. Inc. Security Act

[ ] 422Appeal 28 USC 158 [ ] 423Withdrawal 28 USC 157 PROPERTY RIGHTS [ ] 820Copyrights [ ] 830Patent [X ] 840Trademark SOCIAL SECURITY [ ] 861HIA (1395ff) [ ] 862Black Lung (923) [ ] 863DIWC (405(g)) [ ] 863DIWW (405(g)) [ ] 864SSID Title XVI [ ] 865RSI (405(g)) FEDERAL TAX SUITS [ ] 870Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff

or Defendant) [ ] 871IRS-Third Party

26 USC 7609

[ ] 400 State Reapportionment [ ] 410 Antitrust [ ] 430 Banks and Banking [ ] 450 Commerce/ICC Rates/etc. [ ] 460 Deportation [ ] 470 Racketeer Influenced and

Corrupt Organizations [ ] 810 Selective Service [ ] 850 Securities/Commodities/ Exchange [ ] 875 Customer Challenge 12 USC 3410 [ ] 891 Agricultural Acts [ ] 892 Economic Stabilization Act [ ] 893 Environmental Matters [ ] 894 Energy Allocation Act [ ] 895 Freedom of Information Act [ ] 900 Appeal of Fee Determination

Under Equal Access to Justice [ ] 950 Constitutionality of State

Statutes [ ] 890 Other Statutory Actions

V. ORIGIN (PLACE AN [x] IN ONE BOX ONLY) [X] 1 Original [ ] 2 Removed from [ ] 3 Remanded from [ ] 4 Reinstated or [ ] 5 Transferred from [ ] 6 Multidistrict [ ] 7 Appeal to District Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation Judge From Magistrate (specify) Judgment

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION (CITE THE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WHICH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE.

DO NOT CITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY.) Civil action for trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition arising under the Lanham Act, 15. U.S.C. §1025(a)

VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND: Check YES only if demanded in complaint:

COMPLAINT: [ ] UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 Injunctive Relief and Damages in excess of $75,000 (w/o interests and costs) JURY DEMAND: [] YES [X ] NO

VIII. RELATED CASE(S) (See Instructions): IF ANY QVC, Inc. v. John Thomas Investments, Inc., et al. DOCKET NUMBER 09-cv-3306 (Hon. Anita B. Brody)

DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD April 28, 2010 Signature Validation NM264

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathaniel Metz, Esquire

Case 2:10-cv-01927-MMB Document 1-2 Filed 04/29/10 Page 1 of 2

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS-44 Authority For Civil Cover Sheet The JS-44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows: I. (a) Plaintiffs - Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a Government Agency, use only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, giving both name and title. (b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved). (c) Attorneys. Enter firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney or record. If there are several attorneys list them on an attachment, noting in this section "(see attachment)". II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8 (a), F.R.C.P. which requires that jurisdiction be shown in pleadings. Place an "X" in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below. United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United

States are included here. United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an X in this box. Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331 where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the

United States, an amendment to the Constitution, and act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence and box 1 or 2 should be marked.

Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332 where parties are citizens of different states. When

Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below.) (Federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS-44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship

was indicated above. Mark this section for each principal party. IV. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. V. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of description, in Section IV above, is sufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerks in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than one nature of suit, select the most definitive. VI. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes. Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts. Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28

U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petition for removal is granted, check this box. Remanded for Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date

of remand as the filing date. Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date

as the filing date. Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for

within district transfers or multidistrict litigation transfers. Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28

U.S.C. Section 1407. When this box is checked do not check (5) above. Appeal to District Judge from Magistrate Judgment. (7) Check this box for an appeal from a magistrate's decision. VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P. Demand. In this space enter the dollar amount (in thousands of dollars) being demanded or indicate other demand such as

a preliminary injunction. Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded. VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS-44 is used to reference relating pending cases if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases. Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet. (07/86)


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CASE MANAGEMENT TRACK DESIGNATION FORM QVC, INC. : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : VALUEVISION MEDIA, INC. : NO. d/b/a SHOPNBC In accordance with the Civil Justice Expense and Delay Reduction Plan of this court, counsel for plaintiff shall complete a case Management Track Designation Form in all civil cases at the time of filing the complaint and serve a copy on all defendants. (See § 1:03 of the plan set forth on the reverse side of this form.) In the event that a defendant does not agree with the plaintiff regarding said designation, that defendant shall, with its first appearance, submit to the clerk of court and serve on the plaintiff and all other parties, a case management track designation form specifying the track to which that defendant believes the case should be assigned. SELECT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT TRACKS: (a) Habeas Corpus – Cases brought under 28 U.S.C. §2241 through §2255. ( ) (b) Social Security – Cases requesting review of a decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying plaintiff Social Security Benefits ( ) (c) Arbitration – Cases required to be designated for arbitration under Local Civil Rule 53.2. ( ) (d) Asbestos – Cases involving claims for personal injury or property damage from exposure to asbestos. ( ) (e) Special Management – Cases that do not fall into tracks (a) through (d) that are commonly referred to as complex and that need special or intense management by the court. (See reverse side of this form for a detailed explanation of special management cases.) ( ) (f) Standard Management – Cases that do not fall into any one of the other tracks. (X) __April 28, 2010____ _______________________ Signature Validation No. NM264 Date Nathaniel Metz, Attorney-at-law Attorney for Plaintiff, QVC, Inc. ___610-251-5099________ ______610-722-3271____________ [email protected]________ Telephone FAX Number E-Mail Address (Civ. 660) 10/02


https___ecf.paed.uscourts.gov_cgi-bin_show_temp.pl_file=merged_0.0698642139706287_-1-1285715857

Documents

dba shopnbc defendant

complaint plaintiff

judicial district

valuevision media dba

united states district

subject matter jurisdiction

shady oak road minneapolis

wilson drive west chester