mboho mkparawa ibibio v. okon - third amended complaint.pdf

8/19/2019 Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio v. Okon - third amended complaint.pdf

1/38

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

HOUSTON DIVISION

MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA,

INC.; MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO;

MAURICE E. EKWO,

INDIVIVIDUALLY, AS IMMEDIATE

PAST HIGH COMMISSIONER AND

AGENT OF MBOHO MKPARAWA

IBIBIO/MBOHO MKPARAWA

IBIBIO USA, INC.; ESSIEN ISONG,

INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

DIRECTOR OF MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC.;

GODWIN EKPENE (DECEASED),INDIVIDUALLY; AND GODWIN

EKPENE AS DIRECTOR, CO-

INCORPORATOR AND DEPUTY

HIGH COMMISSIONER OF MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO /MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO.

12-CV-2363

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiffs, §

§

V. §

§

SYLVANUS OKON A/K/ASYLVANUS EDET OKON, JOSEPH

D. IBOKETTE, DR. MACARTAN

"MAC" UKPONG, EFFIONG EYO

MBABA, EMMANUEL ISONG AND

IBOK ESEMA

§§

§

§

§

§

§

Defendants. §

PLAINTIFFS' THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT &

APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

NOW COME MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA,

INC., MAURICE E. EKWO, ESSIEN ISONG and GODWIN EKPENE (Deceased), hereinafter

Case 4:12-cv-02363 Document 266 Filed in TXSD on 03/01/16 Page 1 of 38


2/38

2

called Plaintiffs, complaining of and about SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON,

JOSEPH D. IBOKETTE, DR. MACARTAN "MAC" UKPONG, EFFIONG EYO MBABA,

EMMANUEL J. ISONG and IBOK ESEMA, hereinafter called Defendants.

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. Plaintiffs sue Defendants for violation of the Lanham Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§

1051 Et Seq., and as protected under such treaties as the Paris Convention for the Protection of

Industrial Property; Copyright Act Of 1976, 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 101-810 And §§ 1001-1010), and as

protected under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works; Common

Law Trademark Infringement; Common Law Copyright Infringement; Breach of Fiduciary Duty;

Fraud; Conversion; Tortuous Interference with Existing Contract, damages, and injunctive relief.

Plaintiffs further seek the Court’s assistance to end a dispute and remove uncertainty that has arisen

as a result of Defendants’ appropriation of, and challenge to Plaintiffs’ right to use the trade name

Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI

USA, Inc., Uniforms, Logo, and Motto which Plaintiffs have been using in connection with

charitable activities worldwide.

PARTIES AND SERVICE

2. Plaintiff, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, a foreign nonprofit organization

incorporated under Nigerian law, is an Individual whose United States address is C/o Maurice E.

Ekwo, 6300 Hillcroft Street, Suite 519, Houston, Texas 77081.

3. Plaintiff, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC., a subsidiary of MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO, registered in Texas, is an Individual whose address is C/o Akparawa-anwan

(Dr.) Obot J. Ekwere, 3530 Green Crest Dr., #615, Houston, TX 77082.



3/38

3

4. Plaintiff, Dr. MAURICE E. EKWO, an Individual, Immediate Past High

Commissioner, whose address is 6300 Hillcroft Street, Suite 519, Houston, Texas 77081.

5. Plaintiff, MAURICE E. EKWO, an Immediate Past High Commissioner and Agent of

Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio and Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc. whose address is 6300 Hillcroft

Street, Suite 519, Houston, Texas 77081.

6. Plaintiff, ESSIEN ISONG, an Individual whose address is 14906 Westpark Dr.

#1224, Houston, TX 77082.

7. Plaintiff, ESSIEN ISONG, a Director and a Member of the Central Working

Committee of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc. whose address is 14906 Westpark Dr. #1224,

Houston, TX 77082. As a result of the relationship between Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio and Mboho

Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mr. Isong transferred his membership from Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio in

Nigeria to its USA’s Zone/Chapter, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., in the United States. Dkt.

No. 155-37 pg 6.

8. Plaintiff, GODWIN EKPENE (Deceased), an Individual whose address was 8353

Emerald Lane West, Westland, MI 48185.

9. Plaintiff, GODWIN EKPENE (Deceased), a Director, Co-Incorporator and Deputy

High Commissioner of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio and Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc. whose

address was 8353 Emerald Lane West, Westland, MI 48185.

10. Defendant SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON is a citizen of the

State of Texas, who resides at 75 Big Trl, Missouri City, TX 77459. Said Defendant may be served

by serving his attorney of record, Justice B. Adjei, at 8700 Long Point Rd., Suite 110, Houston, TX

77055.



4/38

4

11. Defendant JOSEPH D. IBOKETTE is a citizen of the State of Texas, who resides at

629 West Heritage Dr., Tyler, TX 75703. Said Defendant may be served by serving his attorney of

record, Justice B. Adjei, at 8700 Long Point Rd., Suite 110, Houston, TX 77055.

12. Defendant DR. MACARTAN "MAC" UKPONG is a citizen of the State of Texas,

who resides at 3114 Pine Heaven Rd., Tyler, TX 75703. Said Defendant may be served by serving

his attorney of record, Justice B. Adjei, at 8700 Long Point Rd., Suite 110, Houston, TX 77055.

13. Defendant EFFIONG EYO MBABA is a citizen of the State of Georgia who resides

at 706 Millstone Dr., Jonesboro, GA 30238. Said Defendant may be served by serving his attorney

of record, Justice B. Adjei, at 8700 Long Point Rd., Suite 110, Houston, TX 77055.

14. Defendant EMMANUEL ISONG is a citizen of the District of Columbia who resides

at 3000 Connecticut NW Ave, Washington DC 20008. Said Defendant may be served by serving his

attorney of record, Justice B. Adjei, at 8700 Long Point Rd., Suite 110, Houston, TX 77055.

15. Defendant IBOK ESEMA is a citizen of the State of Maryland, who resides at 1526

Claridge Rd., Gwynn Oak, MD 21207. Said Defendant may be served by serving his attorney of

record, Justice B. Adjei, at 8700 Long Point Rd., Suite 110, Houston, TX 77055.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

16. This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. §

1331, insofar as it raises questions under the law and treaties of the United States and subject matter

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1338 insofar as it raises questions under trademarks, Paris

Convention, Copyrights, Berne Convention and Unfair Competition.


https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=6&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201331&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=6a9893fb624e39dbb85a8c157ee55ab6https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=6&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201331&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=6a9893fb624e39dbb85a8c157ee55ab6https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=7&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201338&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=cb1d98ee1d738c1515b9230a5a934ca0https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=7&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201338&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=cb1d98ee1d738c1515b9230a5a934ca0https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=6&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201331&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=6a9893fb624e39dbb85a8c157ee55ab6https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=6&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201331&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=6a9893fb624e39dbb85a8c157ee55ab6


5/38

5

17. This Court has supplemental subject matter jurisdiction over the state claims in this

action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) as these state claims form part of the same case and/or

controversy as the federal counts in this action.

18. This Court has personal general jurisdiction, in accordance with traditional notions of

fair play and substantial justice, over Defendants because of Defendants' substantial and continuous

contacts with the forum state.

19. This District is the proper venue for this proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and

28 U.S.C. § 1400. Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio maintains its U.S. headquarters in this district and

Defendant SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON resides in this district.

FACTS

Undisputed

20. Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio is a socio cultural organization of Ibibio youths founded in

1987 in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria to enhance unity and promote Ibibio culture, traditions and dignity

all over the world. Exhibit 1 attached and incorporated here by reference - Okon’s Dep. 58:13-

17, 68:9-11; also see Dkt. No. 155-7 pgs 2-3 (“Who We Are”); Dkt. No. 155-7 pg 2-3

(Registration with the Corporate Affairs).

21. It was later inaugurated/established in the United States in 2005, by the then National

or International President, Akparawa (Obong) Prince Godwin Ntuk Udeh, from the Head Quarters in

Nigeria. Dkt. No. 155-1 pg 9 (Assumed Name Certificate); also see Dkt. No. 155-11 pg 2

(Address by Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON, High

Commissioner of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. at the 2008 Annual Convention); Dkt.

No. 155-15 pg 8 (Address by Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET


https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=8&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201367&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=a4d403010fd5ae9c31f843e21ee44a22https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=9&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201391&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=005c619a314f77698160b27c9a0c9652https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=10&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201400&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=e7811ad7132fd285ad1a6418a676391dhttps://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=10&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201400&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=e7811ad7132fd285ad1a6418a676391dhttps://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=9&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201391&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=005c619a314f77698160b27c9a0c9652https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=f12313a1b5d8ebb541c727043990bd61&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2004%20U.S.%20Dist.%20Ct.%20Pleadings%203503%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=8&_butInline=1&_butinfo=28%20USC%201367&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzB-zSkAl&_md5=a4d403010fd5ae9c31f843e21ee44a22


6/38

6

OKON, High Commissioner of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. at the 2009 Annual

Convention); Dkt. No. 155-18 pg 5 (Address by Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a

SYLVANUS EDET OKON, High Commissioner of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. at

the 2010 Annual Convention); Dkt. No. 155-21 pg 5 (History of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio);

Dkt. No. 155-21 pg 10 (Address by Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET

OKON, High Commissioner of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. at the 2011 Annual

Convention); Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 5 (Defendants’ Notice of Reconstruction and Election of

Interim National Executive Officer to All Members Dated September 19, 2011); Dkt. No. 155-

34 pg 9(Expulsion Letter issued to Defendants on December 19, 2011); Dkt. No. 155-35 pg 13

(Defendants’ Notice of Separation published in the Nigerian Newspaper); Also s ee Dkt. No.

155-41 pg 17 (Houston’s Chapter Chairman, Dr. Ita Udeobong’s Report at the Chapter’s

Meeting held on June 6, 2009); Okon’s Dep. 58:21-24; 68:9-11; Exhibit 2 - Ekwo’s Dep. 33:12-

34:10.

22. All aspiring members, including all defendants, went through 3 months of observation

at the meeting and completed Membership Application just like those completed by Defendants

SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON and EFIONG EYO MBABA. Dkt. No.

155-44 pgs. 6-7; Okon’s Dep. 120:20-122:24; and once admitted as members, all members will be

administered an oath of membership. Dkt. No. 155-44 pgs. 12-14 (Defendants SYLVANUS

OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON and EFIONG EYO MBABA’s Oath of Membership

into Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio).

23. The initial Members in the United State were officially inducted by the then

National/International President, from Nigeria, in 2005. See Dkt. No. 155-9 pg 2 and Exhibit 3



7/38

7

(Press Release by Defendant, Ibok Esema, then PRO) attached and incorporated here by

reference; Okon’s Dep. 58:21-24; 68:9-11; 117:23-118:11; and Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON

a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON and IBOK ESEMA were two of the initial appointed officers of

Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, as Vice Chairman and Public Relations Officer respectively.

24. After the Induction, Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET

OKON was Appointed High Commissioner to Lead the United States Zone in 2006. Okon’s Dep.

123:10-16; See Dkt. No. 155-36 pg 13 (Letter of Initial Appointment of Defendant, SYLVANUS

OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON, as the High Commissioner date February 10, 2006).

He was reappointed the second time in 2006, and a third time in 2010, thereafter . See Dkt. No. 155-

39 pg 5 (Letter of Reappointment of Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET

OKON, as the High Commissioner date September 12, 2006) and Exhibit 4 attached and

incorporated here by reference (Letter of Reappointment of Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON

a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON, as the High Commissioner date August 2, 2010). At no time

during these appointments did SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON refuse or

objected to those appointments.

25. Since 2005, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio and Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. has

been working together; and Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. is an offspring/subsidiary of the

Nigerian based Organization, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio. Okon’s Dep. 27:22-25, 71:12-13, 91:24-

93:6, 98:12-14, 102:10-13, 128:14-19, 145:22-146:4, 154:6-9, 156:12-157:6.

26. Mr. Okon, as the High Commissioner of the Organization in USA, was authorized to

co-ordinate the activities of the Mboho Chapters on the National/International President’s behalf in

special Zones as may be designated by the Central Working Committee which included



8/38

8

incorporating the Organization as a non-profit Organizat ion in the USA pursuant the U.S. Laws

and establ ish as many U.S. Chapters as possible in the United States. See Dkt. No. 153-33; Dkt.

No. 155-6 pg 1 (2007 Constitution & Bylaw of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc); Dkt. No.

155-3 pgs 2-3 (Pre 2007 Constitution of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio and Mboho Mkparawa

Ibibio USA, Inc); Dkt. No. 155-36; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 5 (Composition and Duties Of Mboho High

Commissions) attached and incorporated here by reference.

27. In 2006, Mr. SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON amongst

other incorporator, including one of the Plaintiffs, Godwin Ekpene, who is currently deceased,

as an agent of the Organization, did incorporate the Organization, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio,

in Texas as Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc. See Dkt. No. 155-33 pg 17 (Article of

Incorporation), and Okon’s Dep. 22:23-23:6. Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc. is also

registered with the IRS as a 501(c)(3) Organization. Okon’s Dep. 82:8-17.

28. Plaintiffs and Defendants were members of the same organization, Mboho Mkparawa

Ibibio USA, Inc., a subsidiary of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio until 2011; Okon’s Dep. 41:16-42:11;

Dkt. No. 155-11 pg 4; Dkt. No. 155-11 pg 13; Dkt. No. 155-12 pg 2; Dkt. No. 155-12 pg 11-13;

Dkt. No. 155-14 pg 8; Dkt. No. 155-15 pg 7; Dkt. No. 155-15 pg 9-13; Dkt. No. 155-16 pg 1-2;

Dkt. No. 155-18 pg 9-13; Dkt. No. 155-20 pg 11; Dkt. No. 155-21 pg 11-13; Dkt. No. 155-21 pg

13; Dkt. No. 155-22 pg 1-6.

29. As of 2010, Late Plaintiff, Godwin Ekpene and Plaintiff, Essien Isong were two of the

directors of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc. along with Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a

SYLVANUS EDET OKON, Dr. MaCartan O. Ukpong. Okon’s Dep. 23:23-26:8; Dkt. No. 155-33

pg 25 and 155-34 pg 1.



9/38

9

30. Since It was founded in 1987, its Motto and Logo had always been the same, “oneness

for service”. Okon’s Dep. 63:1-15 and almost all document in Dkt. No. 155.

31. Prior to its establishment in the USA to this day, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio had

created and maintained unique and distinctive: Name, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio; Logo

containing "the sun with seven rays, an open book on top of two elephant tusks mounted on a

green manila with the inscription "oneness for service"; Motto, "Oneness for service" registered

under Nigeria Law; and Trade Dress, Formal Uniform: (A). Men - (a). Traditional Usobo, (b).

White Lace Chieftaincy (long tail and elbow length shirt) and (c). MMI Cap; (B). Women - (a).

'White Lace short sleeve blouse, (b). Complete Wrapper (Ndot Iba), (c). Big Red Headtie.

Informal Uniform: A) Men - (a). Black oblong cap beaded with Mboho logo, (b). White Lace

Chieftaincy (long tail and elbow length shirt), (c). Black Pant; (B) Women - (a) White Lace

Caftan, (b) Black and Gold Head tie. The Registration is valid and is in full force, and has become

incontestable. Plaintiffs have adopted and used the Name, Logo, Motto, and Dress on or after the

inception of the Organization in Nigeria; and the Name, Logo, Motto, and Dress has become

distinctive or inherently distinctive. This was well established in the Parent Organization’s

Constitution in Part 1, Section 1-3 and Part 4, Section 18. Dkt. No. 155-2 pgs 2-3, 155-3 pgs 12-13

(Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio’s Constitution in Part 1, Section 1-3 and Part 4, Section 18); also see

Dkt. No. 155-5 pgs 2, 155-6 pgs 9-10 (Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, Inc.’s “Constitution” and

By-Laws, Article 1 and article 23); Ekwo’s Dep. 61:5-24, 62:2-9, 62:12-25, 63:1-64:5.

32. Defendants finally decided to separate or split from the Organization in November

2011. Exhibit 6 (Letter from a member of the Board of Trustee of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio

USA, INC.) attached and incorporated here by reference; Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 6 (Defendants’



10/38

10

Notice of Reconstruction and Election of Interim National Executive Officer to All Members

Dated September 19, 2011); Dkt. No. 155-35 pg 13(Defendants’ Notice of Separation published

in the Nigerian Newspaper); Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 14 (Claimants’ Notice of Disclaimer of

Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON published on November 27,

2011).

33. Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON, wants to be a

President of this great Organization for life. Okon’s Dep. 215:9-11 and will say anything, true or

false to convince people or make them happy and support him. I d . at 149:12-21.

Disputed

34. The 2007 Bylaws, wrongly named as Constitution and By-Laws adopted for Mboho

Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. was approved by the International President, Akparawa (Obong)

Prince Godwin Ntuk Udeh. Dkt. No. 155-45 pg 7; Dkt. No. 155-5 pg 24; and Okon’s Dep. 84:13-

18., to be used as a subsidiary of MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO and not as a separate

Organization; however, the provision of the parent’s constitution prevails over any chapter’s bylaw

and/or Constitution & Bylaws, where there is a conflict.

35. Mboho Mkp arawa Ibib io was first establi shed in Houston, Texas , United

States as MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO - HOUSTON CHAPTER by OFFONMBUK U.

ESHIETT, ANIEKAN TIM UMOETTE, and UDUAK VICTOR ESHIET, in 2005 as an

unincorporated Association. Dkt. No. 155-1 pg 9 (Assumed Name Certificate); also see Dkt. No.

155-11 pg 2 (Address by Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON,

High Commissioner of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, INC. at the 2008 Annual Convention);

Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 5(Defendants’ Notice of Reconstruction and Election of Interim National



11/38

11

Executive Officer to All Members Dated September 19, 2011); Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 9 (Expulsion

Letter issued to Defendants on December 19, 2011); Dkt. No. 155-35 pg 13 (Defendants’ Notice

of Separation published in the Nigerian Newspaper). The then sitting National/International

President, Akparawa (Prince) Godwin Ntuk Udeh from the International Headquarter in Uyo, Nigeria

was the inaugurator of Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, now known as Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc,

in the United States. See Dkt. No. 155-41 pg 17 (Houston’s Chapter Chairman, Dr. Ita

Udeobong’s Report at the Chapter’s Meeting held on June 6, 2009).

36. Since the inception of MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, there has only been one

President, sometimes called National or International President, for the entire Organization

worldwide; the President then appoints leaders, known as High Commissioner, to lead the respective

Zones/Chapters pursuant to the Constitution and supervised by him; the Zone consists of Chapters,

which are lead by Chairmen.

37. Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON and his Co-

Defendants served for about two (2) to six (6) years until October 2011, when his term ended, when

they decided to separate from the Organization without handing over the Organization’s properties to

newly appointed officers. See Exhibit 6; Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 6 (Defendants’ Notice of

Reconstruction and Election of Interim National Executive Officer to All Members Dated

September 19, 2011); Dkt. No. 155-35 pg 13(Defendants’ Notice of Separation published in the

Nigerian Newspaper); Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 14 (Claimants’ Notice of Disclaimer of Defendant,

SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON published on November 27, 2011).

38. Since the inception of the Organization in the United States, as a Zone and a

subsidiary of the Parent Organization, the Organization has adopted and used the same Logo, Motto,



12/38

12

Uniform/Trade Dress and Name; and is explicitly delineated in the United States version of the

Constitution in article 1 and 23. See Dkt. No. 155-5 pgs 2, 155-6 pgs 9-10 (Mboho Mkparawa

Ibibio, USA, Inc.’s “Constitution” and By-Laws, Article 1 and article 23).

39. Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, since its establishment in 1987 as seen and used in almost

all documents, had adopted a unique, distinctive and prestigious title for its members, “Akparawa”

for Men and “Akparawa-anwan” for women.

40. The Plaintiffs are the owner and/or assignee of the Name, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio

and Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, Inc.; Logo containing “the sun with seven rays, an open book on

top of two elephant tusks mounted on a green manila with the inscription oneness for service”;

Motto, “Oneness for service” registered under Nigeria Law; and Trade Dress, Formal Uniform: (A).

Men - (a). Traditional Usobo, (b). White Lace Chieftaincy (long tail and elbow length shirt) and (c).

MMI Cap; (B). Women - (a). White Lace short sleeve blouse, (b). Complete Wrapper (Ndot Iba),

(c). Big Red Headtie. Informal Uniform: A) Men - (a). Black oblong cap beaded with Mboho logo,

(b). White Lace Chieftaincy (long tail and elbow length shirt), (c). Black Pant; (B) Women - (a)

White Lace Caftan, (b) Black and Gold Head tie. The Registration is valid and is in full force, and

has become incontestable. Plaintiffs have adopted and used the Name, Logo, Motto, and Dress on or

after the inception of the Organization in Nigeria and the Name, Logo, Motto, and Dress have

become distinctive or inherently distinctive. Dkt. No. 155-2 pgs 2-3, 155-3 pgs 12-13 (Mboho

Mkparawa Ibibio’s Constitution in Part 1, Section 1-3 and Part 4, Section 18) and Dkt. No.

155-5 pgs 2, 155-6 pgs 9-10 (Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, USA, Inc.’s “Constitution” and By-

Laws, Article 1 and article 23).



13/38

13

Furthermore, the Name, Logo and Motto the designed service-mark of Plaintiffs, was duly

created and/or registered with the Nigerian Corporate affairs since the 1990s and has been in use

thereafter in all Zones as the Organization grows worldwide.

41. Defendants had not only continued to use the Name, Motto, Logo, Uniform described

above, but are producing counterfeits/imitations to worsen the confusion and dilution already being

created by their acts and conducts. See Exhibit 7 (Plaintiffs’ Uniform, Logo and Name) and

Exhibit 8 (Defendants’ Uniform, Logo and Name) attached and incorporated here by

reference.

42. Usually, the High Commissioner is appointed for a term of 4 years and can be re-

appointed for another term, unless removed pursuant to the constitution for cause; however, on or

about October 10, 2011, when Defendant, Mr. SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET

OKON was replaced by Dr. Maurice E. Ekwo pursuant to the Constitution, he refused to step down;

instead, he made away with the Organization's properties which include but not limited to funds in

financial institutions, Logo, Motto, Uniform/Trade Dress and Name. See Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 8

(Removal letter, removal of Mr. SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON) and

Dkt. No. 155-46 pg 1-2 (Appointment letter, appointing Dr. Ekwo as the new High

Commission to replace Defendant).

43. After his removal in 2011, Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET

OKON, instead of handing over as required by the Constitution, see Dkt. No. 155-6 pgs 3-4 decided

to form an insurgency along with his co-Defendants JOSEPH IBOKETTE, DR. MACARTAN

"MAC" UKPONG, EFFIONG EYO MBABA, EMMANUEL ISONG and IBOK ESEMA taking

along with them amongst other properties of the Organization the names, logo, motto, trade dress,



14/38

14

bank accounts and website. It is worth noting that after the expulsion of Defendants from the

Organization, they did not appeal or protest their expulsion.

44. Defendants, caused an article to be published in Concord news, a Nigerian News

paper that his group of insurgents are separating from the parent body in Nigeria in a coup fashion

without due process accorded to its members and in violation of the Organization’s Constitution.

See Dkt. No. 155-36 pg 8-9 (Publication in Nigerian Newspaper regarding their separation).

By their acts and conducts, Defendants made away with the Organization’s assets including but not

limited to the names, logo, motto, trade dress, bank accounts and website.

45. On or about November 18, 2011, as a result of his continuous defiance, Defendant,

SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON was expelled from the Organization and

ordered to return all Organization’s properties to the new appointed High Commissioner, Dr.

Maurice E. Ekwo. Dkt. No. 155-46 pg 1 (Appointment letter, appointing Dr. Ekwo as the new

High Commission to replace Defendant) and replacement of SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a

SYLVANUS EDET OKON, Dkt. No. 155-46 pg 2; also see Dkt. No. 155-34 pgs 8, 10-15

(Removal and Expulsion letter of SYLVANUS OKON a/k/a SYLVANUS EDET OKON).

46. On or about November 18, 2011, Co-Defendant, Joseph Ibokette was expelled from

the Organization and ordered to return all Organization’s properties to the new appointed High

Commissioner, Dr. Maurice E. Ekwo. See Dkt. No. 155-34 pg. 17 (Expulsion letter to Joseph

Ibokette).

47. On or about December 19, 2011 Co-Defendants, DR. MACARTAN "MAC"

UKPONG, EFFIONG EYO MBABA, EMMANUEL ISONG AND IBOK ESEMA were expelled,

along with other insurgents, from the Organization and ordered to return all Organization’s



15/38

15

properties to the new appointed High Commissioner, Dr. Maurice E. Ekwo. See Dkt. No. 155-34

pgs 19-24 (Expulsion letter to Dr. Mac Ukpong and a host of other insurgents).

48. Mr. Okon refused to step down and conspired with his Co-Defendants, Dr. Ukpong

and Mr. Ibokette to convene illegal meetings forming an independent body with the Organization’s

properties under the same name and/or different variation of the same name, logo, motto and dress. It

was impossible for the Organization to file updated documents with the secretary of states, because

he immediately declared himself as the Interim National President, with the Co-conspirators as the

Treasurer and Secretary respectively. Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 5-6 (Restructuring Notice).

49. Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON, JOSEPH

IBOKETTE, DR. MACARTAN "MAC" UKPONG, EFFIONG EYO MBABA, EMMANUEL

ISONG and IBOK ESEMA, have refused to hand over the assets of the Organization and

fraudulently converting the funds of Plaintiffs and are using these assets for their benefit in violation

of the constitution of the Organization, their oath of offices and/oath of allegiance.

50. Defendants, since November 2011, without the Plaintiffs’ consent, began using and

continues to use the Funds, Logo, Motto, Name, Dress and website, to mention but a few of the

Organization’s properties; or Plaintiffs’ registered mark in interstate commerce and Nigeria.

Specifically, Defendants continue to use Plaintiffs’ Name, Logo and Motto on their letterheads.

51. On January 3, 2012, Plaintiff, Dr. Ekwo was duly authorized by the parent

organization to take legal action to recoup the assets of the Organization, thus, giving him the

Authority to institute this suit. Dkt. No. 155-46 pg 4 (Letter Authorizing Legal Action).



16/38

16

52. As of January 27, 2012, the Organization had in excess of $37,000.00 at stake. See

Dkt. No. 155-40 pgs 10-11 (Letters from Chase Bank and Bank of America showing the

Organization Account Balance).

53. Defendants have refused to provide or disclose any information and documents

regarding the Organization’s bank account. Okon’s Dep. 106:11-107:4.

54. Plaintiffs filed affidavits in support of this Complaint as Dkt. No. 28-6 pg 7-10 and

Exhibit 9(Affidavit of Godwin Ekpene (Deceased)), Exhibit 10 (Affidavit of Dr. Maurice E.

Ekwo) and Exhibit 11 (Affidavit of Essien Isong) attached and Incorporated here by reference.

55. Defendants’ use of the Logo, Motto, name and dress will likely deceive or cause

confusion or mistake as to source or origin of the Organization in the mind of the people of

Ibibio and the community at large. The Defendants’ acts as set forth above constitute

infringement under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)), infringement under the Texas

Trademark Act (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 16.26), or infringement under the United States is

the Copyright Act of 1976 (Copyright Act), 17 U.S.C.S. §§ 101-1101, the Copyright Act, as

protected under the Berne Convention; the Section 43(a)(1)(A) of the Lanham Act [15 U.S.C. §

1125(a)(1)(A)] and as protected under the Paris Convention. Defendants’ infringing actions

were committed willfully and without regard to Plaintiffs’ rights.

56. The Lanham Trademark Act also provides that "Trade names or commercial names of

persons described in subsection (b) of this section shall be protected without the obligation of filing

or registration whether or not they form parts of marks." 15 U.S.C.A. §1126(g). A trademark need

not be registered in the United States in order for a Plaintiff to make a claim under the Lanham Act.



17/38

17

57. Plaintiffs have produced ample evidence to support their position (Dkt. Nos. 28

and 155), whereas, Defendants have neither produced any credible evidence to controvert

Plaintiffs’ evidence nor support their position.

All references to Doc. Entries and Exhibits referenced herein are incorporated here by

reference for all purposes.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF THE LANHAM TRADEMARK ACT, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1051 et seq. AND

PARIS CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY

58. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs of this

Petition as set forth at length herein verbatim.

59. The Plaintiffs, are, and at all times mentioned in this complaint has been, engaged in

the business of promoting events, programs and services that will bring progress to the community

members, of Akwa lbom State residing Nigeria, USA and throughout the World. The Plaintiffs are

the Owners of a mark consisting of the word "Mboho" with a shadow effect and the words

"Mkparawa Ibibio" to the Left of the wording appears a design consisting of a Horseshoe Shape with

the slogan "Oneness For Service" appearing in the Bottom Bell of the Horseshoe Shape with two

Crossed Elephant Tusks above the Horseshoe Shape and an Open Book appearing between the Tusks

with a partial Sun with Rays extending therefrom appearing behind and above the book registered

under Nigeria Law and used in the United States by Plaintiffs since May 2005. The English

Translation of "Mboho Mkparawa" in the Mark is "Unity, Young at Heart. The Mark is valid and is

in full.



18/38

18

Furthermore, Plaintiffs are owners of the design of the Formal Uniform: (A). Men - (a).

Traditional Usobo, (b). White Lace Chieftaincy (long tail and elbow length shirt) and (c). MMI Cap;

(B). Women - (a). 'White Lace short sleeve blouse, (b). Complete Wrapper (Ndot Iba), (c). Big Red

Headtie. Informal Uniform: A) Men - (a). Black oblong cap beaded with Mboho logo, (b).

White Lace Chieftaincy (long tail and elbow length shirt), (c). Black Pant; (B) Women - (a)

White Lace Caftan, (b) Black and Gold Head tie. The Registration is valid and is in full force, and

has become incontestable.

Plaintiffs have adopted and used the Name, Logo, Motto, and Dress on or after the inception

of the Organization in Nigeria and the Name, Logo, Motto, and Dress are suggestive, arbitrary and/or

fanciful and has become distinctive or inherently distinctive. Exhibit 2 - Ekwo’s Dep. 61:5- 64:5.

60. The Defendant, on or after October 16, 2011, without the Plaintiff s’ consent, began

using and continues to use a reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of Plaintiff s’

mark in interstate commerce or in the United States in connection with selling, offering for sale, or

advertising of services or began and continues to reproduce, counterfeit, copy, or colorably imitate

the Plaintiff s’ mark and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation to

letterhead, signs, prints, wrappers, head-ties, or advertisements intended to be used in interstate

commerce or in Texas on or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, or advertising of services.

Specifically, using the name, logo, Uniform, Website to advertise and at conventions, on or about

October 16, 2011, and continuing to the present, the Defendant has used a mark throughout the

United States.

61. The Defendants’ use of the mark is likely to deceive or cause confusion or mistake as

to source or origin of the Plaintiff s’ goods or services. The Defendants’ acts as set forth above



19/38

19

constitute trademark or service mark infringement under Section 32(1) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C.

§ 1114(1)). Furthermore, Defendants' Conducts, and that of those in concert with them, violates the

laws of the United States, including the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125. The conspirators' use of false

designations of origin, on and/or in connection with their services, and in commercial advertising or

promotion, violates the Lanham Act. Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (1976).

The conspirators' use of Plaintiffs’ designs, trademarks, trade dress, brand names and other marks,

and copyrighted materials to facilitate their service violates the Lanham Act. All of such conducts are

likely to cause confusion, mistake or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection or association of the

conspirators with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of their goods or

services, and/or to misrepresent the nature, characteristics, qualities or geographic origin of their

goods or services. All of such conducts damaged Plaintiffs and continues to damage Plaintiffs, for

which damages Plaintiffs hereby sues to recover herein. All of such conducts was intentional and

malicious.

62. Defendants’ use of Plaintiff s’ name, banners, logo, motto and dress are in violation of

the Lanham Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1051 et seq., which provides that "(a)ny person whose

country of origin is a party to any convention or treaty relating to service marks, trade, or commercial

names, or the repression of unfair competition, to which the United States is also a party, or extends

reciprocal rights to nationals of the United States by law, shall be entitled to the benefits of this

section under the conditions expressed herein to the extent necessary to give effect to any provision

of such convention, treaty or reciprocal law, in addition to the rights to which any owner of a mark is

otherwise entitled by this chapter." Section 44(b) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1126(b) (1976).


https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=26&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201114&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=3c4d1d4245ea5982cfe53198212303d4https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=26&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201114&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=3c4d1d4245ea5982cfe53198212303d4https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=26&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201114&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=3c4d1d4245ea5982cfe53198212303d4https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=26&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201114&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=3c4d1d4245ea5982cfe53198212303d4


20/38

20

The conduct of Defendants clearly constitutes unfair competition under the common law of

the State of Texas. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing conduct by Defendants,

Plaintiffs was caused to suffer damages which it seeks to recover herein.

63. Although Defendants have not produced any evidence of their registration of the

Organization’s Name, Logo, Motto, and/or Uniform with the Texas Trademark Office, they want this

Court to believe that they have “registered” the organization in Texas, knowing this to be false.

Defendants are using Plaintiffs Trade Name and/or Trademarks, which is registered in Nigeria and

been in use since 1987, in violation of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property

(hereinafter, the "Paris Convention"). Article 6bis(1) of the Convention provides that at the request

of an interested party, a country should undertake "to refuse or to cancel the registration, and prohibit

the use, of a trademark which constitutes a reproduction, an imitation, or a translation, liable to

create confusion, of a mark considered by the competent authority of the country of registration or

use to be well known in that country as being already the mark of a person entitled to the benefits of

this Convention and used for identical or similar goods. These provisions shall also apply when the

essential part of the mark constitutes a reproduction of any such well-known mark or an imitation

liable to create confusion there-with." In this case, the Marks are so unique to the Plaintiffs and

cannot be used or reproduced by any other organization in Nigeria except Plaintiffs. Therefore the

Plaintiffs are in serious violation of the Lanham Act.

Defendants have also consistently made false or misleading statements of fact about their

ownership of the Organization including Name, Logo, Motto, and/or Uniform, to mention but a few

of their claims; their claims or statement have deceived, continues to deceive or had the capacity to

deceive a substantial segment of potential members; the deceptions was material, in that they have



21/38

21

influenced, continue to influence or likely to influence the masses’ membership decisions; the deceits

are effective as to the services rendered by the organization which is in interstate commerce; and

Plaintiffs have been, continue to and is likely to be injured as a result of these false statement. 15

U.S.C. § 1114(1)(a)

64. Both the United States and Nigeria are signatories to the Paris Convention.

65. Plaintiffs’ name, banners, logo, motto and dress are arbitrary, distinct and thus strong

and there are substantial similarity between the Plaintiffs marks such that the marks creates the same

overall impression in community, which has great impact on the likelihood of confusion. See the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a)

66. Defendants have violated both international law and United States law by copying and

using the name, logo, motto, dress and Titles (which is registered and has been recognized as

belonging to MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO under Nigerian law decades before the unauthorized

use of the name, motto, and logo in the United States) on their letterhead without authorization to

compete with Plaintiffs. . See Exhibits 7 (Plaintiffs’ Uniform, Logo and Name) and 8

(Defendants’ Uniform, Logo and Name).

67. The actions of the Defendants have caused confusion amongst community members

by misleading the public as to the ownership and the origin of the Name, Logo, Motto and Dress, and

such confusion has injured the Trust.

68. Despite repeated demands by Plaintiff s to cease unauthorized use of the “MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO” and/or “MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, USA INC.” name logo, motto and

dress, Defendants have adamantly continued to use the name and logo.



22/38

22

69. The conduct and actions of Defendants represent a clear violation of both the Lanham

Trademark Act and the Paris Convention, which has caused Plaintiffs to sustain damages.

70. Beginning at least as early as 1987, the Plaintiff adopted and used the mark or trade

name or trade dress described herein above in connection with its promoting events, programs and

services that will bring progress to the community members, of Akwa lbom State residing Nigeria,

USA and throughout the World., and the mark or trade name or trade dress has been used by the

Plaintiff continuously since that time. The Plaintiffs’ mark or trade name or trade dresses inherently

distinctive or has become distinctive of its services and has become a famous mark by virtue of

longstanding use, extensive advertising and publicity, and widespread recognition by consumers and

those in the trade, and has been exclusively used in connection with the above-described services.

The Plaintiffs’ mark or trade name or trade dress has been registered in Nigeria and used in the

United States since May 2005, which is/are valid and in full force.

71. Since the Plaintiffs’ mark or trade name or trade dress has become famous, the

Defendant has begun using and is commercially using the mark or trade name or trade dress that

causes or has caused dilution of the distinctive quality of Plaintiffs’ famous mark. Accordingly, the

Defendants’ conduct constitutes dilution in violation of Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C.

§ 1125(c)) and Texas Business and Commerce Code Section 16.103. The Defendants’ conduct was

carried out with knowledge of the existence of the Plaintiffs’ famous mark. The Defendants’ actions

as described above were willful and deliberate, were committed in bad faith, and were committed for

the purpose of trading on Plaintiffs’ reputation and causing dilution of Plaintiff s’ famous mark.

72. In view of Plaintiffs’ prior use and prior common law rights to the Logo, Uniform, Mboho

Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI USA, INC.


https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=31&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201125&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=d93b4b7aed9e4de7d79efa090e1c218ehttps://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=31&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201125&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=d93b4b7aed9e4de7d79efa090e1c218ehttps://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=31&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201125&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=d93b4b7aed9e4de7d79efa090e1c218ehttps://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=31&_butInline=1&_butinfo=15%20U.S.C.%201125&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=d93b4b7aed9e4de7d79efa090e1c218e


23/38

23

Service-Name to identify their organization and the Defendants’ actions as described herein,

Defendants’ use of the term Bubba’s Logo, Uniform, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho

Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI USA, INC. to identify a competing in the United

States, violates Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Defendants’ infringing

actions are committed willfully and without regard to Plaintiffs rights. Defendants’ willful,

malicious, fraudulent and/or deliberate violation of the act qualifies this case as an exceptional case

for which Plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys’ fees and damages. Despite attempts to deter Defendants

from continuing infringement and a timely filing of this suit, Defendants continue their infringement

with intent to confuse or deceive the masses, divert sales or membership recruitment in a manner

that there are no adequacy remedies, (4) any unreasonable delay by the Plaintiff in asserting his

rights, and continues the “palming off."

Therefore, Plaintiffs are entitled to:

(a) its actual damages, including damages for loss of goodwill, and any profits resulting

from Defendant’s acts of unfair competition;

(b) a permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from any Service-Name or Service-

mark containing the Logo, Motto, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho

Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI USA, Inc. in their operation in

Texas and the United States at large;

(c) exemplary damages, as set out below; and

(d) Attorney’s fees under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).

COUNT II



24/38

24

VIOLATION OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1976, 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 101-810 and §§

1001-1010), AND BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF

LITERARY AND ARTISTIC WORKS



74. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (hereinafter,

the "Berne Convention") Article 5(1) provides that "Authors shall enjoy, in respect of works for

which they are protected under this Convention, in countries of the Union other than the country of

origin, the rights which their respective laws do now or may hereafter grant to their nationals, as well

as the rights specifically granted by this Convention." The Berne Convention provides further that

"(t)he enjoyment and exercise of these rights shall not be subject to any formality; such enjoyment

and such exercise shall be independent of the existence of protection in the country of origin of the

work." Article 5(2).

Defendants may contend that they are not liable for copyright infringement because they own

the Name, Logo, Motto, and Dress. However, they came into possession of the Name, Logo, Motto,

and Dress while serving as Plaintiffs’ Officers, and they have not and cannot produce evidence to

their ownership or permission for continuous use after their expulsion from the Organization.

Although Plaintiffs demonstrated that they repeatedly asserted their copyright rights, Defendants

have repeatedly ignored Plaintiffs’ protected rights. Moreover, because Defendants continued to

infringe even after Plaintiffs filed this law suit, it clearly indicates a danger of continuous

infringement in the future. As such, Defendants is liable for copyright infringement because they

continued to infringe on Plaintiffs’ copyrights after Plaintiffs sued Defendants.

75. Both the United States and Nigeria are signatories of the Berne Convention.



25/38

25

76. The Copyright Act of 1976 (hereinafter, the "Copyright Act") extends copyright

protections in the United States to "pictorial, graphic" works. 17 U.S.C.A. § 102(a)(5).

77. The Copyright Act provides that a court may grant a temporary and/or a final

injunction in order to "prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright." 17 U.S.C.A. § 502(a).

78. The Copyright Act provides that a court may grant an order to impound and/or destroy

all copies which have been made or used in violation of the copyright, and all plates, molds,

matrices, masters, tapes, film negatives, or other articles by means of which such copies may be

reproduced. 17 U.S.C.A. § 503.

79. The Copyright Act also provides that a copyright infringer is liable to the copyright

owner for all actual damages and lost profits suffered as a result of the infringement, or said

copyright infringer is liable for statutory damages as provided by the Copyright Act, at the copyright

owner's option. 17 U.S.C.A. § 504.

80. The Copyright Act provides that the Court may allow for the recovery of full costs

and reasonable attorneys' fees against a copyright infringer. 17 U.S.C.A. § 505.

81. Defendants have violated both international law and United States law by copying and

using Plaintiff s’ name “MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO” and/or “MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO,

USA, INC.” and the original and creative Plaintiffs graphic logo and motto (which is registered and

has been recognized as belonging to Plaintiffs under Nigerian law decades before Defendants'

unauthorized use of the logo and motto) in manner inconsistent with Plaintiff s’ right including on

their letterhead without authorization.



26/38

26



such confusion has injured Plaintiffs.

83. Despite repeated demands by Plaintiffs to cease unauthorized use of the MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO Logo graphic, Motto, and Dress; Defendants have continued to use the logo

graphic, Motto, and Dress.

84. The conduct and actions of Defendants represent a clear violation of both the

Copyright Act and the Berne Convention. Defendants’ infringing actions are committed willfully and

without regard to Plaintiffs rights.

COUNT III

COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT



86. All Defendants, based on their aforesaid conduct with respect to their unauthorized

and intentional use of the original and creative “MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO” and/or “MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC.” trademark logo in the identification of their letterhead, publicity

and distribution of newsletters, have created a likelihood of confusion or deception as to the origin of

the Organization.


in the United States and abroad by misleading the people as to the ownership and the origin of the

Organization and such confusion have injured and continue to injure the Plaintiffs.



27/38

27

88. Defendants’ actions as described have caused confusion in view of Plaintiffs’ prior

use and prior common law rights to use the Motto, Logo, Uniform, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA,

Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI USA, INC. as a Service-Name and

Mark identifying their operation in Texas and in the United States. Their use of the Motto, Logo,

Uniform, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or

MMI USA, INC. as a Service-Name and Mark to designate a competing operation in Texas and

United States, infringes on the Plaintiffs’ common law rights to its Service-Name or Service-Mark.

Defendants’ infringing actions are committed willfully and without regard to Plaintiffs rights.

In the event a likelihood of confusion and infringement is found, Plaintiffs are entitled

to:

(a) its actual damages, including damages for loss of goodwill, and any profits

resulting from Defendants’ infringement;

(b) a permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from using any Service-Name or

Service-mark containing the Motto, Logo, Uniform, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA,

Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI USA, INC. in

connection with their operation in Texas and the United States at-large;

(c) exemplary damages, as set out below.

UNFAI R COMPETI TION

89. In view of Plaintiff s’ prior use and prior common law rights to the Name, Motto,

Logo, Uniform, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio,

MMI or MMI USA, INC. Service-Name to identify their operation in Texas and United States at

large and the Defendants’ actions as described above, Defendants’ use of the Motto, Logo, Uniform,



28/38

28

Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI

USA, INC. to identify competing services, constitutes unfair competition. Defendants’ infr inging

actions are committed willfully and without regard to Plaintiffs rights.

In the event a likelihood of confusion and unfair competition are found, Plaintiffs are

entitled to:


resulting from Defendant’s acts of unfair competition;

(b) a permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant from using any Service-Name or

Service-mark containing the Logo, Motto, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc.,

Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI USA, Inc. in their

operation in Texas and the United States at large;


COUNT IV.

COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT



91. All Defendants, based on their aforesaid conduct with respect to their unauthorized

and intentional use of the original and creative “MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO” and/or “MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO, USA INC.” ar twork in the identification of their letterhead, publicity and

distribution of newsletters, have created a likelihood of confusion or deception as to the origin of the



29/38

29

Organization. They are using the exact name, logo or logo layout, motto and dress. See Exhibits 7

(Plaintiffs’ Uniform, Logo and Name) and 8 (Defendants’ Uniform, Logo and Name).



such confusion has injured the Plaintiffs.

93. As a result of the actions of all Defendants, the Plaintiffs have suffered and continue

to suffer injury and damages. Defendants’ infringing actions are committed willfully and without

regard to Plaintiffs rights.

In the event a likelihood of confusion and unfair competition are found, Plaintiffs are

entitled to:


resulting from Defendant’s acts of unfair competition;

(b) a permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant from using any Service-Name or

Service-mark containing the Logo, Motto, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc.,

Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio, MMI or MMI USA, Inc. in their

operation in Texas and the United States at large;


COUNT V

MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO AND MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC.’S

CLAIM FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY





30/38

30

95. Plaintiff, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC. and Defendants had a fiduciary

relationship as principal and agents respectively; each one of them took an oath of office,

membership and alliance.

96. Defendants as Officers of MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC. owes the

Organization the duty of the utmost good faith, not to usurp corporate opportunity for personal gain,

duty of loyalty, to mention but a few.

97. Defendants' conducts constitute a breach of the fiduciary duty owe to Plaintiffs.

98. Defendants' conducts has caused and continues to cause Plaintiffs' injuries, to wit,

Defendants have made away with Plaintiffs' Properties and funds.

COUNT VI


CLAIM FOR FRAUD



100. Defendants took an oath to uphold the constitution and be loyal to the Organization.

101. His Promise was material to appointing or electing them to their respective Offices.

102. When they made the oath or swore to be loyal, they knew that they were making false

promises; this can be evidenced by Defendant, SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET

OKON’s use of the title of a President on the article of amendments filed with the secretary of states

in 2010 and 2011. Dkt. No. 155-33 pg 26 and Dkt. No. 155-34 pg 3, respectively.

103. Defendants made the promise to induce the Cooperation to trust and retaining them.

104. Plaintiffs relied on their oath in retaining them.



31/38

31

105. As a result of their false promises, Plaintiff, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO and

MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC. has suffered and continue to suffer damages.

COUNT VII


CLAIM FOR CONVERSION



107. Plaintiffs, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO AND MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO

USA, INC. own different chapters with bank accounts including those under tax ID XX-XXXX648,

donated books, Uniforms and other items of value.

108. The items are personal items including but not limited to caps, certificates, records,

donated books.

109. Defendants have wrongfully taken these properties.

110. The wrongful taking of these items is costing Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs have

suffered damages.

111. Plaintiffs are entitled to damages in the amount equal to the value of the properties

converted by Defendants.

COUNT VIII


CLAIM FOR TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH EXISTING CONTRACT




32/38

32


113. In 2011, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO and MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA,

INC. terminated Mr. SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON's Appointment and

appointed Dr. Maurice E Ekwo as its High Commissioner. Plaintiffs MBOHO MKPARAWA

IBIBIO and MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC. appointed Maurice E. Ekwo as the new

High Commissioner in charge of the United States and Canada Zone; at the Same time, Essien Isong

was serving as Plaintiffs’ Director and Director of Protocol. The two were to carry out the duties of

the organization and raise fund to accomplish Plaintiffs goals as were promised by Maurice E. Ekwo

and Essien Isong through their oath of office. Defendants’ knowing this, willfully and intentionally

interfer ed with the Plaintiffs’ contract by hindering the execution of the agreement by running away

with all the necessary funds and tools for the performance and achievement of their duties, thus,

making performance more burdensome or difficult, or of less or no value to the Plaintiffs. To this

day, Defendants continue to hinder the Plaintiffs duties; even with the newly appointed High

Commissioner, Akparawa-Anwan (Dr.) Obot Ekwere’s duties.

114. Mr. SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON, rather than step down,

continued to divert company's assets to its personal interest of remaining in power under the same

name.

115. Mr. Okon and his Co-Defendants are aware of the termination and appointment.

Defendants interfered with the Organizations contract with Dr. Ekwo, Essien Isong and Godwin

Ekpene by making it impossible to manage the Organizations affair as mandated.

116. As a result of Defendants’ conducts, Plaintiffs have suffered damages because

Plaintiff s’ assets are being diverted.



33/38

33



34/38

34

EXEMPLARY AND TREBLE DAMAGES

117. In the event a likelihood of confusion and violation(s) of Plaintiffs’ rights are found,

Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of exemplary damages under common law and treble damages

under the Lanham Act. Defendants’ acts were done with knowledge of Plaintiffs’ prior use of the

Logo, Motto, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio USA, Inc., Mboho Mkparawa, Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio,

MMI or MMI USA, Inc. as a Service-Name, and their acts of infringement and unfair competition

have been willful, deliberate, and with malice, as shown by Defendants’ statements to Plaintiffs’

member since October 11, 2011, by the advertisements and publications that he caused to be

published in Nigerian Newspaper, worldwide internet, by their theft of Plaintiffs’ properties, and by

other false statements they made about Plaintiffs’.

118. The Defendants’ actions as described above were committed with malice as defined

in Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 41.100(7) in that the Defendants’ actions were

specifically intended to harm the Plaintiffs in its business. The Defendants’ conduct warrants the

assessment of exemplary damages against the Defendants under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies

Code Section 41.003.

119. Unjust Enrichment As a result of the conduct of the Defendants’ wrongful

infringement and/or dilution of the Plaintiffs’ mark or trade name or trade dress and other

wrongful acts described above, the Defendants have been unjustly enriched, and the Plaintiffs are

entitled to recover all profits/revenues derived by the Defendant as a result of his/her/its

wrongful conduct.


https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=29&_butInline=1&_butinfo=TEX.%20CIV.%20PRAC.%20REM.%20CODE%2041.003&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=ebadff92ee00546314776c981d8c3a34https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=29&_butInline=1&_butinfo=TEX.%20CIV.%20PRAC.%20REM.%20CODE%2041.003&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=ebadff92ee00546314776c981d8c3a34https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=29&_butInline=1&_butinfo=TEX.%20CIV.%20PRAC.%20REM.%20CODE%2041.003&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=ebadff92ee00546314776c981d8c3a34https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=29&_butInline=1&_butinfo=TEX.%20CIV.%20PRAC.%20REM.%20CODE%2041.003&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=ebadff92ee00546314776c981d8c3a34


35/38

35

PLAINTIFFS’ DAMAGES

120. The Plaintiffs have been damaged by the foregoing acts of the Defendants in the

following respects:

a. The Converted amount in the sum of, at least, $37,845.25(amount known to be

available to Plaintiffs before the time of Defendants’ Separation).

b. The Plaintiffs have lost membership and revenue.

c. The Plaintiffs have lost valuable goodwill.

d. The Plaintiffs have lost royalties.

e. The Plaintiffs have incurred expenses in counteracting the effect of the Defendants’

unlawful use of the confusingly similar mark or trade name and trade dress.

f. Plaintiffs have lost funds that existed at the time of the insurgency.

g. Plaintiffs have lost properties of the organization including books donated to

the Organization for the benefit of Mboho Unity School in Uyo, Nigeria.

h. All profits/revenues derived by the Defendant as a result of his/her/its wrongful

conduct

REQUEST FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

121. Unless the Defendants are enjoined from the acts complained of, the Plaintiffs and the

public will suffer irreparable harm, for which the Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. The

Plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction under Rule 680 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs respectfully request judgment as follows:

That permanent injunctions be ordered after hearing or on final trial enjoining the

Defendants, SYLVANUS OKON A/K/A SYLVANUS EDET OKON, JOSEPH D.

IBOKETTE, DR. MACARTAN "MAC" UKPONG, EFFIONG EYO MBABA,

EMMANUEL ISONG AND IBOK ESEMA, their attorneys, agents, and all other

natural persons or business or legal entities acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of

Defendants, whether authorized to do so or not. from:


https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=33&_butInline=1&_butinfo=TEX.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%20680&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=d8c1cbb7f6a7ed08ba696ff948528012https://www.lexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=6703fae3bef4cea0220bd9afc95cce21&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b13-200%20Dorsaneo%2c%20Texas%20Litigation%20Guide%20%a7%20200.110%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=33&_butInline=1&_butinfo=TEX.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%20680&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAb&_md5=d8c1cbb7f6a7ed08ba696ff948528012


36/38

36

1. Using a reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of the Plaintiff s’ mark

in interstate commerce or in any commerce within the United States, in connection

with selling, offering for sale, or advertising of any goods or services;

2. Engaging in any and every activity in organizing any meeting and convention using

the funds, name, banners, logo, motto, dress and website of MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC., MBOHO MKPARAWA, MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI USA, INC.;

3. Withdrawing funds from all and any account in the name of MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC., MBOHO MKPARAWA, MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI USA, INC. accounts including all

Organization’s account under Tax ID 56-2607648; Account No. 687975110 and

other accounts relating to or associated with MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA,

INC., MBOHO MKPARAWA, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI

USA, INC.;

4. Using the logo, motto and dress of MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC.,

MBOHO MKPARAWA, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI USA,

INC. anywhere for any purpose, private or public without the express written

permission of MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC., MBOHO

MKPARAWA, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI USA, INC.’s

U.S. High Commissioner;

5. Using the distinctive title/designation “Akparawa” for Men and “Akparawa-

anwan” for women.

6. Portraying themselves as officers and members of MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO

USA, INC., MBOHO MKPARAWA, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or

MMI USA, INC.;

7. Interfering in any manner any funds from all and any account in the name ofMBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC., MBOHO MKPARAWA, MBOHO

MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI USA, INC. accounts, including all

Organization’s accounts under Tax ID 56-2607648; Account No. 687975110; the

amount in excess of $37,845.25 available in the name of MBOHO MKPARAWA

IBIBIO USA, INC., MBOHO MKPARAWA, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO,



37/38

37

MMI OR MMI USA, INC. as of January 27, 2012, and other accounts relating to or

associated with MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC., MBOHO

MKPARAWA, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI USA, INC. in

any manner as existed as of October 10, 2011.

8. Misappropriating the names and identities of bona fide members who signed up for

life insurance as members of the Organization or altering their information and

benefits therein.

9. Making disparaging remarks regarding the Plaintiffs, to wit: including but not limited

to calling them fake, illegitimate, illegal.

ATTORNEY FEES

122. This is an exceptional case, such that Plaintiffs are entitled to their attorney fees under

15 U.S.C. § 1117 and Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 38.001.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demands judgment against all Defendants, jointly and severally,

as follows:

1. That Defendants be Enjoined as plead above.

2. Defendants be Order to disclose and turn over all accounts in the name of or relating

in any way with MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO USA, INC., MBOHO

MKPARAWA, MBOHO MKPARAWA IBIBIO, MMI or MMI USA, INC.

3. That the Plaintiffs be awarded actual, compensatory, and/or statutory damages for

the harm suffered in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of the court;

4. That Defendants be Ordered to return all fund taken by them during the time of their

separation;



38/38

5. That Defendants be ordered to return the books donated for the benefit of Mboho

Unity School, Uyo, Nigeria;

6. Defendants be ordered to relinquish possession of or turn over the Tax ID

56-2607648 assigned to the Organization.

7. That the Defendants be required to disgorge and pay to the Plaintiffs all

profits/revenue that the Defendants have unjustly earned as a result of its

infringement of Plaintiff s’ mark and other wrongful conduct described above.

8. That the Plaintiffs have judgment for the costs of suit, including reasonable attorney's

fees as allowed by law;

9. Exemplary Damages as allowed by law;

10. Prejudgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law; and

11. Any and all such other relief deemed equitable and just by this Court, as provided

by law.

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Gogo U.K. Owor

GOGO U.K. OWORTexas Bar No. 24026105

6475 Hillcroft Street, Suite B

Houston, TX 77081

Tel. (713) 778-8000

Fax. (713) 779-4646

Attorney for Plaintiffs

Certificate of Service

I certify that on March 1, 2016, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Document wasserved by facsimile transmission on JUSTICE B. ADJEI, ESQ. electronically through the electronic

filing manager.

/s/ Gogo U.K. Owor GOGO U.K. OWOR


mboho mkparawa ibibio v. okon - third amended complaint.pdf

Documents