Free Reply Brief - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 1 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 2 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 3 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 4 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 5 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 6 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 7 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 8 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 9 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 10 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 11 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 12 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 13 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 14 of 14

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 1 of 22

Exhibit A

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 2 of 22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION KV PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY, Plaintiff, vs. KVK-TECH, INC., Serve at: 110 Terry Drive, Suite 200 Newtown, PA 18940 Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT This is an action for trade name infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, unfair competition under Missouri common law, and dilution under Missouri statutory law. Plaintiff KV Pharmaceutical Company ("Plaintiff" or "KV") is seeking a permanent injunction, damages, profits, treble damages or profits, attorneys' fees, and costs. Plaintiff, appearing through its undersigned counsel, alleges as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 2503

South Hanley Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63144-2555. Plaintiff is incorporated under the name "K-V Pharmaceutical Company" and uses the trade name "KV Pharmaceutical Company." 2. Upon information and belief, Defendant KVK-Tech, Inc. ("Defendant" or

"KVK") is a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal place of business at 110 Terry Drive, Suite 200, Newtown, Pennsylvania 18940.

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 3 of 22

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This is a claim for damages and injunctive relief for unfair competition under the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), et seq., for unfair competition under Missouri common law, and for dilution under the Missouri Dilution Statute, Mo. Stat. § 417.061(1). 4. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to the Lanham

Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1121, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. 5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the claims in this Complaint which

arise under the statutory and common law of the State of Missouri pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(b), since the state law claims are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common nucleus of operative facts. 6. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because Defendant

transacts business within this judicial district, and the acts complained of herein that have caused and are continuing to cause injury to Plaintiff have occurred and are continuing to occur within this judicial district. PLAINTIFF'S DISTINCTIVE KV TRADE NAME 7. KV is a recognized leader in the manufacture and sale of generic and branded

pharmaceuticals and the development of drug delivery technologies. KV markets and distributes its product lines through its three subsidiary companies: Ther-Rx Corporation (branded pharmaceuticals), ETHEX Corporation (generic pharmaceuticals), and Particle Dynamics, Inc. (drug delivery technologies).

-223235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 4 of 22

8.

KV was founded in 1942 and has used the distinctive trade name "KV

Pharmaceutical" (the "KV Trade Name") to identify itself in commerce for over 50 years. 9. KV is a contract researcher and manufacturer for major pharmaceutical

companies. In the early 1950s, KV began developing and patenting drug delivery technologies such as extended-release and coating technologies. In the 1970s, KV enhanced its business by developing raw materials for the pharmaceutical, nutritional, and personal markets. KV began producing generic drugs in the early 1990s. In 1999, KV established its subsidiary Ther-Rx Corporation to market branded pharmaceutical products manufactured by KV. 10. KV is today a full-fledged pharmaceutical company which obtains over 90% of its

revenues from the sale of pharmaceutical products. 11. KV is widely regarded as one of the best-run and most admired small companies

in America. In 2004, KV was listed in Forbes Magazine's list of "America's 200 Best Small Companies." KV uses the ticker symbols "KVA" and "KVB" to identify its two classes of publicly traded stock. 12. KV's revenues have increased every year for twelve straight years and have

doubled over the last five years. In fiscal year 2007, Plaintiff's unaudited gross revenues from the sale of pharmaceutical products were approximately $424.5 million. Plaintiff's total gross revenues from fiscal years 2001-2007 are over $1.8 billion. 13. Plaintiff, through its subsidiaries ETHEX and Ther-Rx, has widely advertised

itself as a manufacturer and seller of pharmaceutical products and drug delivery technologies.

-323235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 5 of 22

14.

Plaintiff prominently displays the KV Trade Name on its web site, on its

letterhead, in press releases, on its employees' business cards, on the packaging and inserts for ETHEX and Ther-Rx products, and on promotional and marketing material. 15. Plaintiff's KV Trade Name serves as a unique identifier of Plaintiff's products

among the general public, including consumers in the pharmaceuticals market, and serves to distinguish Plaintiff's products from its competitors' products. 16. As a result of Plaintiff's longtime use, substantial sales, and significant

promotional efforts for Plaintiff's pharmaceutical products, Plaintiff's KV Trade Name has become well known to the pharmaceutical industry and the general public throughout the United States. 17. Plaintiff's KV Trade Name has achieved a secondary meaning in the market place

among pharmaceutical customers and the general public identifying Plaintiff as the sole source of its goods. Customers and members of the general public throughout the United States have come to recognize the KV Trade Name and to associate the KV Trade Name exclusively with Plaintiff and Plaintiff `s goods. Plaintiff's KV Trade Name is a business asset of substantial value to Plaintiff. DEFENDANT'S USE OF KVK AS A TRADE NAME AND TRADEMARK 18. Upon information and belief, Defendant is in the business of developing,

manufacturing, and marketing generic and proprietary pharmaceuticals. 19. Defendant uses the trade name "KVK-TECH." Upon information and belief,

Defendant began using this trade name no earlier than 2002, long after Plaintiff's first use of the KV Trade Name.

-423235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 6 of 22

20.

Defendant promotes and sells its pharmaceutical products under the trademark

KVK. Upon information and belief, Defendant began commercially using this trademark no earlier than 2002, long after Plaintiff's first use of the KV Trade Name. 21. Defendant's pharmaceutical products compete directly in the same market with

Plaintiff's pharmaceutical products and are marketed and sold to the same consumers as Plaintiff's pharmaceutical products. 22. Defendant is actively promoting its pharmaceutical products on the Internet using

the domain names www.kvktech.com, www.kvk-tech.com, and www.kvkresearch.com. Plaintiff's URL address is www.kvpharmaceutical.com. COUNT I - UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER THE LANHAM ACT 23. herein. 24. Plaintiff's continuous and substantially exclusive use of Plaintiff's KV Trade Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 22 above, as if fully set forth

Name in the pharmaceutical field for over 50 years has established a strong association between Plaintiff and the KV Trade Name in the minds of customers and the general public. 25. Without Plaintiff's permission, Defendant has adopted and is continuing to use

the trade name "KVK-TECH" in the same field of business in which Plaintiff uses the KV Trade Name. 26. Without Plaintiff's permission, Defendant has adopted and is continuing to use

the KVK trademark on its pharmaceutical products, and is advertising and promoting to the general public its goods under the KVK trademark.

-523235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 7 of 22

27.

Upon information and belief, Defendant has sold, advertised, transported and

distributed, or caused to be distributed, directly or indirectly, its pharmaceutical products bearing the KVK trademark in interstate commerce, including to customers located in Missouri. Defendant represents on its web site that its products are available throughout the United States. 28. As a direct consequence of Defendant's actions, Plaintiff's customers, potential

customers, and the general public have been and are likely to continue to be mistaken, deceived or confused into believing that Defendant's products were made by, licensed by, sponsored by, endorsed by, approved by, authorized by, or otherwise affiliated with Plaintiff. 29. Upon information and belief, Defendant adopted and is currently using the KVK

trademark and the trade name "KVK-TECH" with full knowledge of Plaintiff's rights and with the intent to deceive, mislead and confuse customers and the public into believing that KV is the source of Defendant's pharmaceutical products, or that Defendant's pharmaceutical products are sponsored by, endorsed by, licensed by, or affiliated with KV so as to enable Defendant to take advantage of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name and the substantial fame, reputation and goodwill enjoyed by Plaintiff in connection with Plaintiff's KV Trade Name. 30. Defendant's use of the KVK trademark in connection with Defendant's

pharmaceutical products constitutes unfair competition and false representation as to source in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). 31. Defendant's use of the trade name "KVK-TECH" constitutes unfair competition

and false representation as to source in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

-623235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 8 of 22

32.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful acts and practices,

Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, damage to its business, reputation and goodwill, for which Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief and damages. COUNT II - UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER MISSOURI LAW 33. herein. 34. Plaintiff's KV Trade Name has acquired a secondary meaning and significance Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 32 above, as if fully set forth

that serves to identify Plaintiff and distinguish Plaintiff's products from those of others. 35. Defendant has unfairly used a simulation of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name with

fraudulent intent and to the prejudice of Plaintiff's interests. 36. Defendant's actions are likely to cause confusion as to the source of Defendant's

goods and are likely to lead the public to believe that Defendant and/or Defendant's pharmaceutical products are in some way connected with Plaintiff. 37. Defendant's actions constitute intentional and willful unfair methods of

competition, and palming off in violation of the common law of Missouri. 38. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unfair competitive acts in

contravention of Missouri common law, Plaintiff has been injured and damaged, and is entitled to injunctive relief and to recover actual damages, as well as attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this litigation. COUNT III - VIOLATION OF MISSOURI DILUTION STATUTE (§ 417.061(1)) 39. herein. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 38 above, as if set forth fully

-723235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 9 of 22

40.

As a result of the sales, advertising, promotion, and distribution referenced herein,

Plaintiff's KV Trade Name is a distinctive trade name in the State of Missouri. 41. Defendant's unauthorized use of the KVK trademark and the "KVK-TECH" trade

name has caused and is likely to continue to cause injury to Plaintiff's business reputation in the State of Missouri pursuant to § 417.061(1). 42. Defendant's unauthorized use of the KVK trademark and the "KVK-TECH" trade

name has caused dilution of the distinctive quality of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name and is likely to continue to cause dilution of the distinctive quality of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name in the State of Missouri. 43. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's actions, Plaintiff has been injured

and damaged, and is entitled to injunctive relief. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor and grant the following relief: A. An injunction enjoining Defendant and its officers, directors, employees,

subsidiaries or affiliates from using the trademark KVK, the trade name KVK-TECH, or any other mark, logo, trade name, business name, or other indication of source that is confusingly similar to Plaintiff's KV Trade Name and to change their corporate name and website name to ensure that it is not confusingly similar to Plaintiff's KV Trade Name; B. An injunction enjoining Defendant from selling, advertising or promoting any of

its products that infringe and/or dilute Plaintiff's KV Trade Name;

-823235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 10 of 22

C. proven at trial; D.

That Plaintiff be awarded its actual damages and lost profits in an amount to be

That Defendant be required to account for any profits attributable to their

infringing acts; E. That Plaintiff be awarded the greater of three times Defendant's profits and three

times any damages sustained by Plaintiff, and prejudgment interest; F. G. That punitive damages be awarded to Plaintiff; That all products, labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, letterhead

and advertisements in the possession of Defendant bearing any word, term, name, symbol, device, combination thereof, designation, description, or representation that is found in violation of the Lanham Act, or any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation thereof, and all other means of making the same, shall be delivered up by Defendant and destroyed; H. That pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116, Defendant file and serve a report under oath

within thirty days of the issuance of injunctive relief indicating the manner in which it has complied with any injunctive relief ordered by the Court; I. and J. and proper. That Plaintiff be granted such other and further relief which the Court deems just That Plaintiff be awarded its reasonable attorneys' fees in prosecuting this action;

-923235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 11 of 22

Respectfully submitted, SONNENSCHEIN NATH & ROSENTHAL LLP

BY_______/s/ Stephen H. Rovak______________ Stephen H. Rovak - 4218 Justine N. Margolis - 533404 One Metropolitan Square, Suite 3000 St. Louis, MO 63102-2741 (314) 241-1800 (314) 259-5959 (fax) BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY, PC Bassam N. Ibrahim (pro hac to be filed) S. Lloyd Smith (pro hac to be filed) Bryce J. Maynard (pro hac to be filed) 1737 King Street, Suite 500 Alexandria, Virginia 22314-2756 703-836-6620 703-836-2021 (fax) BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY, PC Constance Huttner (pro hac to be filed) One Chase Manhattan Plaza, 35th Floor New York, New York 10005 (212) 440-4426 (212) 440-4401 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiff KV Pharmaceutical Company

November 20, 2007

- 10 23235232\V-2

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 12 of 22

Exhibit B

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 13 of 22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION KV PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY, Plaintiff, vs. KVD PHARMA, INC., Serve at: 131 Chambers Brook Rd. Somerville, NJ 08876 Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT This is an action for trade name infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, unfair competition under Missouri common law, and dilution under Missouri statutory law. Plaintiff KV Pharmaceutical Company ("Plaintiff" or "KV") is seeking a permanent injunction, damages, profits, treble damages or profits, attorneys' fees, and costs. Plaintiff, appearing through its undersigned counsel, alleges as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff is a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business at 2503

South Hanley Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63144-2555. Plaintiff is incorporated under the name "K-V Pharmaceutical Company" but uses the trade name "KV Pharmaceutical Company." 2. Upon information and belief, Defendant KVD Pharma, Inc. ("Defendant" or

"KVD") is a New Jersey Corporation with its principal place of business at 131 Chambers Brook Rd., Somerville, New Jersey 08876.

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 14 of 22

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This is a claim for damages and injunctive relief for unfair competition under the

Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), et seq., for unfair competition under Missouri common law, and for dilution under the Missouri Dilution Statute, Mo. Stat. §417.061(1). 4. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to the Lanham

Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1121, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. 5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the claims in this Complaint which

arise under the statutory and common law of the State of Missouri pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(b), since the state law claims are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common nucleus of operative facts. 6. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because Defendant

transacts business within this judicial district, and the acts complained of herein that have caused and are continuing to cause injury to Plaintiff have occurred and are continuing to occur within this judicial district. PLAINTIFF'S DISTINCTIVE KV TRADE NAME 7. KV is a recognized leader in the manufacture and sale of generic and branded

pharmaceuticals and the development of drug delivery technologies. KV markets and distributes its product lines through its three subsidiary companies: Ther-Rx Corporation (branded pharmaceuticals), ETHEX Corporation (generic pharmaceuticals), and Particle Dynamics, Inc. (drug delivery technologies). 8. KV was founded in 1942 and has used the distinctive trade name "KV

Pharmaceutical" (the "KV Trade Name") to identify itself in commerce for over 50 years.

-223227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 15 of 22

9.

KV was founded in 1942 in St. Louis, Missouri as a contract researcher and

manufacturer for major pharmaceutical companies. In the early 1950s, KV began developing and patenting drug delivery technologies such as extended-release and coating technologies. In the 1970s, KV enhanced its business by developing raw materials for the pharmaceutical, nutritional, and personal markets. KV began producing generic drugs in the early 1990s. In 1999, KV established its subsidiary Ther-Rx Corporation to market branded pharmaceutical products manufactured by KV. 10. KV is today a full-fledged pharmaceutical company which obtains over 90% of its

revenues from the sale of pharmaceutical products. 11. KV is widely regarded as one of the best-run and most admired small companies

in America. In 2004, KV was listed in Forbes Magazine's list of "America's 200 Best Small Companies." KV uses the ticker symbols "KVA" and "KVB" to identify its two classes of publicly traded stock. 12. KV's revenues have increased every year for twelve straight years and have

doubled over the last five years. In fiscal year 2007, Plaintiff's unaudited gross revenues from the sale of pharmaceutical products were approximately $424.5 million. Plaintiff's total gross revenues from fiscal years 2001-2007 are over $1.8 billion. 13. Plaintiff, through its subsidiaries ETHEX and Ther-Rx, has widely advertised

itself as a manufacturer and seller of pharmaceutical products and drug delivery technologies. 14. Plaintiff prominently displays the KV Trade Name on its web site, on its

letterhead, in press releases, on its employees' business cards, on the packaging and inserts for ETHEX and Ther-Rx products, and on promotional and marketing material.

-323227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 16 of 22

15.

Plaintiff's KV Trade Name serves as a unique identifier of Plaintiff's products

among the general public, including consumers in the pharmaceuticals market, and serves to distinguish Plaintiff's products from its competitors' products. 16. As a result of Plaintiff's longtime use, substantial sales, and significant

promotional efforts for Plaintiff's pharmaceutical products, Plaintiff's KV Trade Name has become well known to the pharmaceutical industry and the general public throughout the United States. 17. Plaintiff's KV Trade Name has achieved a secondary meaning in the market place

among pharmaceutical customers and the general public identifying Plaintiff as the sole source of its goods. Customers and members of the general public throughout the United States have come to recognize the KV Trade Name and to associate the KV Trade Name exclusively with Plaintiff and Plaintiff's goods. Plaintiff's KV Trade Name is a business asset of substantial value to Plaintiff. DEFENDANT'S USE OF KVD AS A TRADE NAME AND TRADEMARK 18. Upon information and belief, Defendant is in the business of manufacturing and

selling pharmaceuticals. 19. Defendant uses the trade name "KVD Pharma." Upon information and belief,

Defendant began using this trade name no earlier than 2004, long after Plaintiff's first use of the KV Trade Name. 20. Defendant promotes and sells its pharmaceutical products under the trademark

KVD. Upon information and belief, Defendant began commercially using this trademark no earlier than 2006, long after Plaintiff's first use of the KV Trade Name. Plaintiff became aware of Defendant's use of KVD thereafter.

-423227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 17 of 22

21.

Defendant's pharmaceutical products compete directly in the same market with

Plaintiff's pharmaceutical products and are marketed and sold to the same consumers as Plaintiff's pharmaceutical products. 22. Defendant is actively promoting its pharmaceutical products on the Internet using

the URL address www.kvdpharma.com. Plaintiff's URL address is www.kvpharmaceutical.com. COUNT I - UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER THE LANHAM ACT 23. herein. 24. Plaintiff's continuous and substantially exclusive use of Plaintiff's KV Trade Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 22 above, as if fully set forth

Name in the pharmaceutical field for over 50 years has established a strong association between Plaintiff and the KV Trade Name in the minds of customers and the general public. 25. Without Plaintiff's permission, Defendant has adopted and is continuing to use

the trade name "KVD Pharma" in the same field of business in which Plaintiff uses the KV Trade Name. 26. Without Plaintiff's permission, Defendant has adopted and is continuing to use

the KVD trademark on its pharmaceutical products, and is advertising and promoting to the general public its goods under the KVD trademark. 27. Upon information and belief, Defendant has sold, advertised, transported and

distributed, or caused to be distributed, directly or indirectly, its pharmaceutical products bearing the KVD trademark in interstate commerce, including to customers located in Missouri. 28. As a direct consequence of Defendant's actions, Plaintiff's customers, potential

customers, and the general public have been and are likely to continue to be mistaken, deceived

-523227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 18 of 22

or confused into believing that Defendant's products were made by, licensed by, sponsored by, endorsed by, approved by, authorized by, or otherwise affiliated with Plaintiff. 29. Upon information and belief, Defendant adopted and is currently using the KVD

trademark and the trade name "KVD Pharma" with full knowledge of Plaintiff's rights and with the intent to deceive, mislead and confuse customers and the public into believing that KV is the source of Defendant's pharmaceutical products, or that Defendant's pharmaceutical products are sponsored by, endorsed by, licensed by, or affiliated with KV so as to enable Defendant to take advantage of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name and the substantial fame, reputation and goodwill enjoyed by Plaintiff in connection with Plaintiff's KV Trade Name. 30. Defendant's use of the KVD trademark in connection with Defendant's

pharmaceutical products constitutes unfair competition and false representation as to source in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). 31. Defendant's use of the trade name "KVD Pharma" constitutes unfair competition

and false representation as to source in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). 32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful acts and practices,

Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, damage to its business, reputation and goodwill, for which Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief and damages.

COUNT II - UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER MISSOURI LAW 33. herein. 34. Plaintiff's KV Trade Name has acquired a secondary meaning and significance Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 32 above, as if fully set forth

that serves to identify Plaintiff and distinguish Plaintiff's products from those of others.

-623227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 19 of 22

35.

Defendant has unfairly used a simulation of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name with

fraudulent intent and to the prejudice of Plaintiff's interests. 36. Defendant's actions are likely to cause confusion as to the source of Defendant's

goods and are likely to lead the public to believe that Defendant and/or Defendant's pharmaceutical products are in some way connected with Plaintiff. 37. Defendant's actions constitute intentional and willful unfair methods of

competition, and palming off in violation of the common law of Missouri. 38. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unfair competitive acts in

contravention of Missouri common law, Plaintiff has been injured and damaged, and is entitled to injunctive relief and to recover actual damages, as well as attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this litigation. COUNT III - VIOLATION OF MISSOURI DILUTION STATUTE (§417.061(1)) 39. herein. 40. As a result of the sales, advertising, promotion, and distribution referenced herein, Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 38 above, as if set forth fully

Plaintiff's KV Trade Name is a distinctive trade name in the State of Missouri. 41. Defendant's unauthorized use of the KVD trademark and the "KVD Pharma"

trade name has caused injury to Plaintiff's business reputation and is likely to continue to cause injury to Plaintiff's business reputation in the State of Missouri pursuant to § 417.061(1). 42. Defendant's unauthorized use of the KVD trademark and the "KVD Pharma"

trade name has caused dilution of the distinctive quality of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name and is likely to continue to cause dilution of the distinctive quality of Plaintiff's KV Trade Name in the State of Missouri.

-723227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 20 of 22

43.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's actions, Plaintiff has been injured

and damaged, and is entitled to injunctive relief. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor and grant the following relief: A. An injunction enjoining Defendant and its officers, directors, employees,

subsidiaries or affiliates from using Plaintiff's KV Trade Name or any other mark, logo, trade name, business name, or other indication of source that is confusingly similar to Plaintiff's KV Trade Name and to change their corporate name and website name to ensure that it is not confusingly similar to Plaintiff's KV Trade Name; B. An injunction enjoining Defendant from selling, advertising or promoting any of

its products that infringe and/or dilute Plaintiff's KV Trade Name; C. proven at trial; D. That Defendant be required to account for any profits attributable to their That Plaintiff be awarded its actual damages and lost profits in an amount to be

infringing acts; E. That Plaintiff be awarded the greater of three times Defendant's profits and three

times any damages sustained by Plaintiff, and prejudgment interest; F. G. That punitive damages be awarded to Plaintiff; That all products, labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, letterhead

and advertisements in the possession of Defendant bearing any word, term, name, symbol, device, combination thereof, designation, description, or representation that is found in violation

-823227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 21 of 22

of the Lanham Act, or any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation thereof, and all other means of making the same, shall be delivered up by Defendant and destroyed; H. That pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116, Defendant file and serve a report under oath

within thirty days of the issuance of injunctive relief indicating the manner in which it has complied with any injunctive relief ordered by the Court; I. and J. and proper. That Plaintiff be granted such other and further relief which the Court deems just That Plaintiff be awarded its reasonable attorneys' fees in prosecuting this action;

-923227799\V-1

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JJF

Document 75-2

Filed 08/11/2008

Page 22 of 22

Respectfully submitted, SONNENSCHEIN NATH & ROSENTHAL LLP By ________/s/ Stephen H. Rovak____________________ Stephen H. Rovak - 4218 Justine N. Margolis - 533404 One Metropolitan Square, Suite 3000 St. Louis, MO 63102-2741 (314) 241-1800 (314) 259-5959 (fax) BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY, PC Bassam N. Ibrahim (pro hac admission to be filed) S. Lloyd Smith (pro hac admission to be filed) Bryce J. Maynard (pro hac admission to be filed) 1737 King Street, Suite 500 Alexandria, Virginia 22314-2756 703-836-6620 703-836-2021 (fax) BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY, PC Constance Huttner (pro hac admission to be filed) One Chase Manhattan Plaza, 35th Floor New York, New York 10005 (212) 440-4426 (212) 440-4401 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiff KV Pharmaceutical Company Dated: August 2, 2007

- 10 23227799\V-1