UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION
Case No. 1:25-cv-22847-AMC
VERIMARK HOSPITALITY GROUP INC., a Delaware corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORAL VERIMARK RESORTS LLC, a Florida limited liability company,
Defendant.
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT, UNFAIR COMPETITION, AND TRADEMARK DILUTION
Plaintiff Verimark Hospitality Group Inc. ("VHG" or "Plaintiff"), by and through its undersigned attorneys, Calderwood & Harkness LLP, brings this Verified Complaint against Defendant Coral Verimark Resorts LLC ("CVR" or "Defendant") for federal trademark infringement under Section 32(1) of the Trademark Act of 1946, as amended (the "Lanham Act"), 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1); federal unfair competition and false designation of origin under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); federal trademark dilution under Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c); Florida common law trademark infringement; and violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Fla. Stat. § 501.204. In support of its claims, VHG alleges the following upon personal knowledge, investigation of counsel, and information and belief:
VHG is the owner of the famous and distinctive VERIMARK family of marks, which it has used continuously in interstate commerce for hospitality services — including luxury resort, hotel, and related accommodation services — since September 3, 2007, a period of over seventeen (17) years. VHG owns multiple federal trademark registrations on the Principal Register of the United States Patent and Trademark Office for the VERIMARK marks, at least two of which have achieved incontestable status. Over the course of nearly two decades, VHG has built the VERIMARK brand into one of the most recognized names in the American hospitality industry, generating approximately $1.87 billion in annual revenue and investing approximately $142 million per year in marketing and brand promotion.
CVR is a boutique resort operator formed in January 2024 — more than sixteen years after VHG's first use in commerce — that has adopted and is using the confusingly similar marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" and the stylized logo "VR Verimark" in connection with identical luxury resort services in VHG's core southeastern United States market, including a property located approximately four miles from one of VHG's flagship Fort Lauderdale resort properties. Despite receiving two cease-and-desist demands from VHG and its counsel, CVR has refused to cease its infringing use, has expanded its operations to additional locations, and has filed a federal trademark application seeking registration of the mark "VERIMARK RESORTS" with the USPTO.
VHG respectfully seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, an award of actual damages and/or CVR's profits, enhanced damages for willful infringement, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, cancellation of CVR's pending trademark application, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and equitable.
I. NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for federal trademark infringement under Section 32(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1); federal unfair competition and false designation of origin under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); federal trademark dilution under Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c); Florida common law trademark infringement; and violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA"), Fla. Stat. § 501.204.
2. CVR's unauthorized adoption and use of marks incorporating the term "VERIMARK" — the distinctive and famous house mark of Plaintiff — for identical hospitality services in overlapping geographic markets and trade channels is likely to cause, and has in fact already caused, consumer confusion, mistake, and deception as to the source, origin, sponsorship, and affiliation of CVR's services.
3. VHG retained Broadleaf Investigations Inc. ("Broadleaf"), a nationally recognized private investigation firm, to conduct a marketplace investigation between March 2024 and June 2025. Broadleaf's investigation included mystery shopping at CVR's resort properties, domain and web traffic analysis, social media monitoring, and review of consumer correspondence and online travel agency listings. Through this investigation, Broadleaf documented twenty-three (23) discrete instances of actual consumer confusion between March 2024 and June 2025, including, without limitation: (a) misdirected reservation inquiries from consumers intending to book at CVR properties who contacted VHG's reservation system, and vice versa; (b) social media posts and comments misattributing CVR's properties, services, and promotional materials to VHG; and (c) consumer reviews posted on VHG property pages on major online travel agency platforms (including Bramwell Holdings, Aldermere Technologies, and Kestrel Group) that clearly describe experiences at CVR properties. A summary of these documented instances of actual confusion is attached hereto as Exhibit K.
4. Despite receiving two cease-and-desist demands — the first dated May 14, 2024, and the second dated August 12, 2024 — CVR has refused to cease its infringing use of the VERIMARK marks, has continued to expand its operations, and has affirmatively sought federal trademark registration for the infringing mark "VERIMARK RESORTS." CVR's deliberate and continued use of marks confusingly similar to VHG's famous VERIMARK marks, in the face of clear knowledge of VHG's prior rights and documented evidence of actual consumer confusion, constitutes willful infringement entitling VHG to enhanced remedies under the Lanham Act.
II. THE PARTIES
A. Plaintiff Verimark Hospitality Group Inc.
5. Plaintiff Verimark Hospitality Group Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. VHG is publicly traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the ticker symbol "VMHG."
6. VHG maintains its principal corporate headquarters at 2200 Bayshore Boulevard, Suite 1400, Tampa, Florida 33629. VHG's registered agent in the State of Delaware is Capitol Statutory Services Inc., located at 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. VHG's Employer Identification Number is 26-3847192.
7. VHG operates in the hospitality and real estate industry and is one of the leading branded resort and hotel operators in the United States and the Caribbean. VHG owns, manages, and operates a portfolio of seventy-four (74) branded resort and hotel properties across eighteen (18) states and the Caribbean, all of which operate under the VERIMARK family of marks.
8. VHG's annual revenue for fiscal year 2024 was approximately $1.87 billion, substantially all of which was derived from services provided under the VERIMARK marks. During fiscal year 2024, VHG invested approximately $142 million in marketing and advertising (representing approximately 7.6% of total revenue), promoting the VERIMARK marks through a comprehensive, multi-channel marketing program encompassing national and regional television advertising, digital advertising and search engine marketing, print media advertising in travel, lifestyle, and business publications, social media campaigns, travel industry partnerships, and its proprietary VERIMARK Rewards loyalty program.
9. VHG's Chief Executive Officer is Donald R. Hargrove. VHG's General Counsel is Sonia M. Trevino. VHG's Vice President of Brand Protection is Leonard Yee, who is responsible for the protection and enforcement of VHG's trademark portfolio worldwide.
B. Defendant Coral Verimark Resorts LLC
10. Defendant Coral Verimark Resorts LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Florida. CVR was formed on January 8, 2024, with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations. A copy of CVR's Florida Secretary of State filings is attached hereto as Exhibit L.
11. CVR maintains its principal office at 6810 Ocean Drive, Unit 3, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308. CVR's registered agent in the State of Florida is Suncoast Filing Services LLC, located at 100 S.E. 3rd Avenue, Suite 210, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301. CVR's Employer Identification Number is 93-1568240.
12. CVR operates in the boutique luxury coastal resort industry. Upon information and belief, CVR's estimated annual revenue for calendar year 2024, which was a partial year encompassing approximately nine and one-half (9.5) months of operations (from approximately March 15, 2024, through December 31, 2024), was approximately $4.3 million. Upon information and belief, CVR's projected gross revenue for calendar year 2025 is approximately $6.8 million.
13. CVR currently operates two resort properties: (a) "Verimark Resorts Fort Lauderdale," located at 6810 Ocean Drive, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308, which opened on or about March 15, 2024; and (b) "Verimark Resorts Harborline Enterprises Head," located at 44 Lighthouse Road, Harborline Enterprises Head Island, South Carolina 29928, which opened on or about June 1, 2024. Upon information and belief, CVR is in the process of developing a third resort property located at 1025 Emerald Coast Parkway, Destin, Florida 32541.
14. CVR's Managing Member and Founder is Rafael J. Medina. CVR's Co-Member and Operations Director is Gabriela N. Serrano. Upon information and belief, Mr. Medina and Ms. Serrano are the sole members of CVR and exercise day-to-day control over CVR's operations, including all decisions relating to CVR's branding, marketing, and use of the infringing marks.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction
15. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Counts I through III of this Verified Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because those claims arise under the Trademark Act of 1946, as amended (the Lanham Act), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq., which is an Act of Congress relating to trademarks, unfair competition, and false designation of origin.
16. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims asserted in Counts IV and V of this Verified Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because those claims are so related to the federal claims within the original jurisdiction of this Court that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution. Specifically, the state law claims arise from the same nucleus of operative facts as the federal Lanham Act claims — namely, CVR's unauthorized adoption and use of marks confusingly similar to VHG's VERIMARK marks in connection with identical hospitality services.
B. Personal Jurisdiction
17. This Court has personal jurisdiction over CVR because CVR is a Florida limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Florida, with its principal office located at 6810 Ocean Drive, Unit 3, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308, which is within the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. CVR is thus a resident of the State of Florida and is subject to the general jurisdiction of the courts of this state.
18. In addition, this Court has specific personal jurisdiction over CVR because CVR conducts substantial and continuous business within this judicial district, including, without limitation: (a) operating a resort property at 6810 Ocean Drive, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308; (b) marketing and promoting its services to consumers within this judicial district through the website www.verimarkresortsgroup.com, the Northpoint Services Inc. handle @verimarkresortsofficial, and other marketing channels; and (c) engaging in the acts of trademark infringement, unfair competition, and dilution complained of herein, which occurred in substantial part within this judicial district.
C. Venue.
19. Venue is proper in the Southern District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) and (b)(2) because: (a) CVR is a resident of this district within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(2), as its principal place of business is located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, which is within this judicial district; (b) a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to VHG's claims occurred in this district, including CVR's operation of its Fort Lauderdale resort property under the infringing marks, CVR's marketing and promotion of its services to consumers in this district, and multiple documented instances of actual consumer confusion occurring within this district; and (c) CVR is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court as set forth above.
IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A. VHG's VERIMARK Marks and Trademark Registrations
20. VHG is the owner of the VERIMARK family of marks (collectively, the "VERIMARK Marks"), which it has used continuously in interstate commerce in connection with hotel, resort, and hospitality services since September 3, 2007 — a period of more than seventeen (17) years.
21. VHG owns the following federal trademark registrations on the Principal Register of the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO"), all of which are valid, subsisting, and in full force and effect:
(a) U.S. Registration No. 3,742,618 — VERIMARK (standard character/word mark), registered March 17, 2009, for services in International Class 043, including hotel and resort services, resort lodging services, hotel and resort restaurant services, and related hospitality services. First use in commerce: September 3, 2007. A certified copy of the registration certificate is attached hereto as Exhibit A-1.
(b) U.S. Registration No. 4,105,233 — VERIMARK HOSPITALITY (standard character/word mark), registered January 10, 2012, for services in International Class 043, including hotel services, resort services, temporary accommodation services, and hospitality services. First use in commerce: September 3, 2007. A certified copy of the registration certificate is attached hereto as Exhibit A-2.
(c) U.S. Registration No. 5,489,701 — VERIMARK "V" Design Mark (stylized design mark featuring a stylized letter "V" in a navy-and-gold color scheme with the word "VERIMARK" below), registered May 22, 2018, for services in International Class 043, including hotel services, resort services, temporary accommodation services, and hospitality services. First use in commerce: January 15, 2015. A certified copy of the registration certificate is attached hereto as Exhibit A-3.
22. VHG's earliest registration, U.S. Registration No. 3,742,618 for the VERIMARK word mark, has been registered on the Principal Register of the USPTO for over sixteen (16) years. As a federally registered trademark on the Principal Register, this registration is entitled to all statutory presumptions afforded under 15 U.S.C. § 1057(b), including presumptions of validity, ownership, and the exclusive right to use the mark in commerce in connection with the goods and services specified in the registration.
23. Upon information and belief, U.S. Registration No. 3,742,618 (registered March 17, 2009) and U.S. Registration No. 4,105,233 (registered January 10, 2012) have achieved incontestable status under 15 U.S.C. § 1065, as VHG has filed the requisite declarations of continued use and incontestability with the USPTO and the marks have been in continuous use in commerce for more than five consecutive years following their respective dates of registration without any adverse final decision in any proceeding concerning VHG's right to register or use the marks.
24. VHG has duly maintained all of its VERIMARK mark registrations by timely filing all required renewal applications and declarations of continued use with the USPTO, including the declarations required under Sections 8 and 9 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1058 and 1059.
B. VHG's Extensive Use, Promotion, and Fame of the VERIMARK Marks
25. VHG has used the VERIMARK Marks continuously and exclusively for over seventeen (17) years in connection with a broad range of hospitality services, including, without limitation: luxury hotel and resort accommodations; conference, meeting, and event planning and hosting services; food and beverage services, including branded restaurants, bars, and in-room dining; spa, wellness, and fitness services; concierge and guest experience services; and travel planning and loyalty program services through the VERIMARK Rewards program.
26. As set forth above, VHG operates a portfolio of seventy-four (74) branded resort and hotel properties across eighteen (18) states and the Caribbean, all of which bear the VERIMARK Marks prominently on signage, building facades, guest room amenities, staff uniforms, marketing materials, and digital properties. VHG's resort and hotel properties include luxury beachfront resorts, urban boutique hotels, and destination resort properties, all operating under the unifying VERIMARK brand identity.
27. VHG's annual revenue for fiscal year 2024 was approximately $1.87 billion, substantially all of which is directly attributable to services provided under the VERIMARK Marks. VHG has experienced consistent revenue growth over the past decade, reflecting the increasing strength and consumer recognition of the VERIMARK brand.
28. During fiscal year 2024, VHG invested approximately $142 million in marketing and advertising (representing approximately 7.6% of total revenue), promoting the VERIMARK Marks through an integrated, multi-channel marketing program that includes: (a) national and regional television advertising campaigns, including placements on major broadcast and cable networks; (b) digital advertising and search engine marketing across Severin Industries, Ashgrove Industries, and major travel search platforms; (c) print media advertising in prominent travel, lifestyle, and business publications, including Ridgeway Corporation, Northgate Corporation, Ashgrove Partners LLC, and The Wall Street Journal; (d) social media marketing across all major platforms, including Northpoint Services Inc., Kestrel Services Inc., X (formerly Fenmore Solutions), Crowne Albany Partners LLC, and Dunmore & Co.; (e) travel industry partnerships with major online travel agencies, including Bramwell Holdings, Aldermere Technologies, and Drayton Software; (f) the VERIMARK Rewards loyalty program, which has over 2.8 million enrolled members; and (g) sponsorship of major hospitality industry conferences and events.
29. VHG operates the website www.verimark.com, which serves as its primary digital storefront and receives millions of unique visitors annually. VHG also maintains an active and widely followed social media presence across all major social media platforms, including its Northpoint Services Inc. account @verimarkhospitality, which has approximately 1.4 million followers. Representative screenshots of VHG's website and social media presence are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
30. The VERIMARK Marks have been the subject of extensive unsolicited media coverage, including features in major national publications and prominent travel industry media. VHG has received numerous industry awards and recognitions, further enhancing the fame and prestige of the VERIMARK brand.
31. As a result of VHG's long, continuous, and extensive use of the VERIMARK Marks in commerce; its massive and sustained advertising and promotional expenditures; the consistently high quality of its services; the volume of its business; the breadth of its geographic reach; the widespread unsolicited media coverage of its brand; and the strong recognition of the VERIMARK Marks among consumers, travel industry professionals, and the general public, the VERIMARK Marks have become famous marks within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(2)(A) and are widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States as designating VHG as the source of luxury hospitality services.
C. VHG's Properties in the Southeastern United States
32. The southeastern United States is a core geographic market for VHG's VERIMARK-branded hospitality services. VHG operates multiple resort and hotel properties in the southeastern United States, including, among others:
(a) "Verimark Oceanview" — located at 1740 N. Fort Lauderdale Beach Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33305. This property is a luxury beachfront resort with 312 guest rooms and suites, multiple restaurants and bars, a full-service spa, and conference and event facilities. The Verimark Oceanview property has been in operation since 2010 and is one of VHG's highest-performing and most visible resort locations.
(b) "Verimark Bayshore Resort" — located at 3400 W. Bayshore Court, Tampa, Florida 33611. This property is a waterfront resort with 248 guest rooms and suites, dining facilities, a spa, and meeting spaces. The Verimark Bayshore Resort has been in operation since 2012.
33. In addition to the properties specifically identified above, VHG operates additional VERIMARK-branded properties in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, as well as in the Caribbean. VHG's southeastern U.S. properties are among its highest-performing and most visible resort locations and are a core component of VHG's brand identity and consumer recognition. The southeastern U.S. market generates a disproportionately significant share of VHG's total revenue and brand engagement.
D. CVR's Formation and Adoption of the Infringing Marks
34. On or about January 8, 2024, Defendant CVR was formed as a Florida limited liability company by filing Articles of Organization with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations. CVR was formed by Rafael J. Medina (Managing Member and Founder) and Gabriela N. Serrano (Co-Member and Operations Director). A copy of CVR's Florida Secretary of State filing is attached hereto as Exhibit L.
35. On or about January 12, 2024, just four days after its formation, CVR registered the domain name www.verimarkresortsgroup.com through domain registrar NetLedger Domains Inc. Domain registration records for www.verimarkresortsgroup.com are attached hereto as Exhibit E.
36. On or about January 20, 2024, CVR created the Northpoint Services Inc. handle @verimarkresortsofficial.
37. On or about March 1, 2024, CVR commenced use in commerce of the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" (word mark) and "VR Verimark" (stylized logo) in connection with luxury coastal resort services, including through its website, social media accounts, online travel agency listings, and at its Fort Lauderdale property.
38. CVR's first use in commerce of marks incorporating "VERIMARK" occurred on or about March 1, 2024 — more than sixteen (16) years after VHG's first use in commerce of the VERIMARK mark on September 3, 2007, and more than fourteen (14) years after VHG obtained its earliest federal trademark registration (U.S. Registration No. 3,742,618, registered March 17, 2009). CVR thus had actual or constructive knowledge of VHG's prior rights in the VERIMARK Marks at the time CVR adopted and commenced use of the infringing marks.
39. Upon information and belief, prior to forming CVR and adopting the "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" marks, Rafael J. Medina and Gabriela N. Serrano were aware of VHG and its VERIMARK-branded hospitality services. VHG's VERIMARK Marks are famous throughout the United States, particularly in the southeastern United States hospitality market, and it is not plausible that individuals forming a new luxury resort company in Fort Lauderdale, Florida — directly in VHG's core market — would be unaware of VHG's longstanding VERIMARK brand.
E. CVR's Infringing Activities
40. CVR currently operates two resort properties under the infringing marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark":
(a) "Verimark Resorts Fort Lauderdale" — located at 6810 Ocean Drive, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308. This property opened on or about March 15, 2024. Upon information and belief, the Verimark Resorts Fort Lauderdale property is a boutique luxury coastal resort offering guest room accommodations, dining services, pool and beach amenities, and concierge services. This property is located approximately four (4) miles from VHG's "Verimark Oceanview" resort property at 1740 N. Fort Lauderdale Beach Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33305. The close geographic proximity of these two identically branded properties in the same market area compounds the likelihood and severity of consumer confusion.
(b) "Verimark Resorts Harborline Enterprises Head" — located at 44 Lighthouse Road, Harborline Enterprises Head Island, South Carolina 29928. This property opened on or about June 1, 2024. Upon information and belief, this property is also a boutique luxury coastal resort offering guest room accommodations and related hospitality services.
41. Upon information and belief, CVR is in the process of developing a third resort property under the infringing marks, located at 1025 Emerald Coast Parkway, Destin, Florida 32541. If CVR is permitted to open this third location under the infringing marks, the scope and severity of consumer confusion will only increase, as VHG also operates branded properties in the Florida Panhandle region.
42. CVR's "VR Verimark" stylized logo utilizes a serif typeface and a blue-and-gold color palette that closely mirrors the overall look and feel of VHG's registered VERIMARK "V" Design Mark (U.S. Registration No. 5,489,701), which features a prominent stylized letter "V" rendered in a navy-and-gold color scheme. The visual similarities between the two logos extend beyond the shared use of the dominant term "VERIMARK" to include similar typographic styling, analogous color choices, and a comparable overall commercial impression. A side-by-side comparison of VHG's "V" Design Mark and CVR's "VR Verimark" stylized logo is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
43. CVR promotes its resort services through the website www.verimarkresortsgroup.com and the Northpoint Services Inc. handle @verimarkresortsofficial, both of which prominently feature the "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" marks. Representative screenshots of CVR's website and Northpoint Services Inc. account are attached hereto as Exhibit C. The domain www.verimarkresortsgroup.com incorporates VHG's VERIMARK mark in its entirety, compounding the likelihood of consumer confusion in online search results and web navigation.
44. The services offered by CVR under the infringing marks — luxury coastal resort accommodations, dining services, concierge services, and related hospitality services — are identical to the services offered by VHG under the VERIMARK Marks. The identity of services is a significant factor weighing in favor of a finding of likelihood of confusion.
45. CVR's services are offered to the same class of consumers as VHG's services — namely, leisure and business travelers seeking luxury resort accommodations in the southeastern United States and the coastal regions thereof. CVR markets and distributes its services through the same or substantially overlapping trade channels as VHG, including: (a) direct online booking through its own website; (b) online travel agency platforms, including Bramwell Holdings, Aldermere Technologies, and Kestrel Group; (c) social media marketing, particularly Northpoint Services Inc.; and (d) travel industry referrals and partnerships. The overlap in the relevant consumer class and trade channels further heightens the likelihood of consumer confusion.
46. CVR's resort operations are concentrated in VHG's core southeastern United States geographic market. CVR's Fort Lauderdale property is in direct geographic proximity — approximately four miles — from VHG's flagship Verimark Oceanview resort in Fort Lauderdale. CVR's Harborline Enterprises Head Island property is located in a region where VHG also maintains a significant brand presence. The geographic overlap between CVR's operations and VHG's established market presence is a further factor increasing the likelihood of confusion.
F. CVR's Pending Trademark Application
47. On or about April 15, 2024, CVR filed U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 98/432,117 with the USPTO, seeking registration of the mark "VERIMARK RESORTS" in International Class 043 for hotel and resort services. A copy of CVR's trademark application is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
48. CVR's trademark application was examined by the USPTO and published for opposition in the Official Gazette on November 5, 2024.
49. On December 3, 2024, VHG timely filed a Notice of Opposition before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB"), opposing CVR's application under TTAB Opposition No. 91/287,456. A copy of VHG's Notice of Opposition is attached hereto as Exhibit M.
50. By stipulation of the parties and order of the TTAB dated February 18, 2025, the TTAB opposition proceeding has been suspended pending the outcome of this district court action. A copy of the TTAB's suspension order is attached hereto as Exhibit N.
51. CVR's attempt to register the mark "VERIMARK RESORTS" with the USPTO further demonstrates CVR's intent to continue and expand its use of marks confusingly similar to VHG's VERIMARK Marks and underscores the need for judicial intervention.
G. Actual Consumer Confusion
52. VHG retained Broadleaf Investigations Inc. ("Broadleaf"), a nationally recognized private investigation firm with extensive experience in trademark enforcement and marketplace investigations, to conduct a comprehensive marketplace investigation regarding the impact of CVR's use of the infringing marks. Broadleaf conducted its investigation over a period of approximately fifteen (15) months, from March 2024 through June 2025. The investigation included mystery shopping at CVR's resort properties, domain and web traffic analysis, social media monitoring across multiple platforms, review of consumer correspondence and complaints received by VHG's customer service department, and analysis of online travel agency listings and consumer reviews.
53. Through its investigation, Broadleaf documented twenty-three (23) discrete instances of actual consumer confusion between March 2024 and June 2025, including, but not limited to, the following categories of confusion:
(a) Misdirected Reservation Inquiries: Consumers intending to make reservations at CVR resort properties contacted VHG's central reservation system, and conversely, consumers intending to book at VHG resort properties contacted CVR, in each case believing they were communicating with the other company. These misdirected contacts involved telephone calls, email inquiries, and online contact form submissions.
(b) Social Media Misattributions: Consumers posted comments, reviews, photographs, and other content on social media platforms (including Northpoint Services Inc. and Kestrel Services Inc.) that misattributed CVR's resort properties, amenities, and guest experiences to VHG, and vice versa. In several instances, consumers tagged VHG's official Northpoint Services Inc. account @verimarkhospitality in posts that depicted CVR properties, and tagged CVR's account @verimarkresortsofficial in posts depicting VHG properties.
(c) Misplaced Online Reviews: Consumer reviews were posted on VHG property listing pages on major online travel agency platforms — including Bramwell Holdings, Aldermere Technologies, and Kestrel Group — that clearly described experiences at CVR's Fort Lauderdale and Harborline Enterprises Head Island resort properties. These reviews referenced specific features, staff members, and experiences unique to CVR's properties but were attributed by the reviewing consumers to VHG's VERIMARK-branded properties.
54. A detailed summary of all twenty-three (23) documented instances of actual consumer confusion, compiled by Broadleaf, is attached hereto as Exhibit K. The summary includes, for each instance, the date of the incident, the nature of the confusion, the platform or channel on which the confusion occurred, and a description of the relevant consumer communication or content.
55. These documented instances of actual consumer confusion constitute powerful evidence that consumers in the marketplace are unable to distinguish between VHG's VERIMARK Marks and CVR's "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" marks. Actual confusion is the best evidence of likelihood of confusion, and the substantial number of documented instances here — twenty-three (23) over a fifteen-month period — demonstrates that the confusion is not isolated or de minimis but rather reflects a systemic pattern of marketplace confusion resulting directly from CVR's adoption and use of marks that are confusingly similar to VHG's famous VERIMARK Marks.
H. VHG's Pre-Suit Demands and CVR's Refusal to Cease Infringing Use
56. On May 14, 2024, VHG's General Counsel, Sonia M. Trevino, sent a cease-and-desist letter to CVR at its principal office address, 6810 Ocean Drive, Unit 3, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308, directed to the attention of Rafael J. Medina, Managing Member. The letter identified VHG's federal trademark registrations and longstanding prior rights in the VERIMARK Marks, informed CVR that its use of "VERIMARK RESORTS" and the "VR Verimark" logo constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition, and demanded that CVR immediately cease all use of marks incorporating "VERIMARK" in connection with hospitality services. A copy of this cease-and-desist letter is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
57. On June 7, 2024, CVR's counsel, Natasha K. Okonkwo of Alcántara Reeves LLP, responded to VHG's cease-and-desist letter on behalf of CVR. In her response, Ms. Okonkwo denied that CVR's use of "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" constituted trademark infringement, and asserted that the term "Verimark" is a descriptive or generic term purportedly meaning "verified mark of quality" in the hospitality industry and is therefore not protectable as a trademark. Ms. Okonkwo declined to cease CVR's use of the marks. A copy of this response letter is attached hereto as Exhibit H.
58. CVR's characterization of "VERIMARK" as a descriptive or generic term is meritless. The term "VERIMARK" is a coined, fanciful term invented by VHG. It does not describe any characteristic, quality, function, or attribute of hospitality services, and it is not a term that competitors need to use to describe their services. The term "Verimark" has no recognized dictionary meaning and does not appear in any standard reference work as a term associated with the hospitality industry. Moreover, VHG's federal registrations on the Principal Register, including registrations that have achieved incontestable status, are conclusive evidence that the VERIMARK mark is not generic and, at a minimum, constitutes a descriptive mark that has acquired secondary meaning. See 15 U.S.C. § 1115(b).
59. On August 12, 2024, Marcus Delgado of Calderwood & Harkness LLP, acting as litigation counsel for VHG, sent a second, more detailed cease-and-desist letter to Natasha K. Okonkwo of Alcántara Reeves LLP, counsel for CVR. This second letter provided a comprehensive legal analysis of VHG's trademark priority and the strength and fame of the VERIMARK Marks; detailed the factual basis for VHG's infringement claims, including a likelihood-of-confusion analysis under the factors set forth in Frehling Enterprises, Inc. v. International Select Group, Inc., 192 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 1999); presented marketplace evidence of actual consumer confusion documented to that date; and demanded that CVR: (i) immediately and permanently cease all use of the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS," "VR Verimark," and any other marks incorporating the term "VERIMARK" in connection with hospitality services or any other goods or services; (ii) withdraw U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 98/432,117 filed with the USPTO; and (iii) disable or transfer the domain www.verimarkresortsgroup.com and the Northpoint Services Inc. handle @verimarkresortsofficial to VHG. A copy of this second cease-and-desist letter is attached hereto as Exhibit I.
60. On September 5, 2024, CVR's counsel, Natasha K. Okonkwo, responded to the second cease-and-desist letter, once again reiterating CVR's position that "Verimark" is a descriptive term not subject to trademark protection and declining to cease CVR's use of the infringing marks or withdraw its pending trademark application. A copy of this response letter is attached hereto as Exhibit J.
61. No settlement discussions or other substantive negotiations between the parties have occurred since September 2024. CVR has continued to operate its two resort properties under the infringing marks, has continued to market its services through the infringing website and social media accounts, and, upon information and belief, has continued development of its third resort property in Destin, Florida.
62. CVR's continued and expanded use of the infringing marks, despite actual knowledge of VHG's prior rights, receipt of two detailed cease-and-desist demands, and awareness of documented evidence of actual consumer confusion, demonstrates that CVR's infringement is willful, deliberate, and in bad faith. CVR's willful infringement entitles VHG to enhanced damages, an award of CVR's profits, and attorneys' fees under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
I. Irreparable Harm to VHG
63. CVR's unauthorized use of the infringing marks has caused and, unless restrained by this Court, will continue to cause immediate and irreparable harm to VHG for which there is no adequate remedy at law, including, without limitation:
(a) Loss of Control Over Brand Quality and Reputation: CVR's use of marks confusingly similar to VHG's VERIMARK Marks causes consumers to associate CVR's resort properties and services with VHG. Because VHG has no control over the quality of CVR's services, CVR's use of the infringing marks deprives VHG of its ability to control the quality of the products and services offered under its brand, which is the essence of trademark protection. Any substandard experience at a CVR property will reflect negatively on VHG's brand and reputation.
(b) Dilution of Distinctive Quality: CVR's use of marks incorporating "VERIMARK" for identical hospitality services dilutes the distinctive quality of VHG's famous VERIMARK Marks by eroding the strong and exclusive association between the VERIMARK name and VHG's hospitality services that VHG has built over more than seventeen years through hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing investment.
(c) Loss of Goodwill and Consumer Trust: The documented instances of actual consumer confusion have resulted in consumer frustration, miscommunication, and negative experiences that erode the goodwill and consumer trust that VHG has carefully cultivated in connection with the VERIMARK Marks. Each instance of confusion undermines consumers' confidence in the VERIMARK brand.
(d) Diversion of Customers and Revenues: CVR's use of confusingly similar marks in VHG's core geographic market, offering identical services to the same class of consumers through overlapping trade channels, has caused and continues to cause the diversion of customers and revenues from VHG to CVR. Consumers who would otherwise book VHG properties are being attracted to CVR properties based on the confusing similarity of the marks.
64. VHG's internal reservation-tracking analysis indicates that CVR's Fort Lauderdale property alone diverted approximately $2.1 million in bookings during calendar year 2024 that would otherwise have been captured by VHG's Verimark Oceanview property and other VHG properties in the Fort Lauderdale market. This estimate is based on a comparative analysis of booking trends, consumer inquiry data, and competitive market intelligence.
65. The harm to VHG's goodwill, brand reputation, and the distinctive quality of its VERIMARK Marks is ongoing, cumulative, and incapable of precise quantification. Monetary damages alone cannot fully compensate VHG for the ongoing erosion of its brand value, the loss of consumer trust, and the destruction of the exclusive association between the VERIMARK name and VHG's hospitality services. VHG is therefore entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive relief.
V. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
COUNT I: FEDERAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT (15 U.S.C. § 1114(1))
66. VHG incorporates and realleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 65 above as though fully restated herein.
67. VHG is the owner of valid, subsisting, and federally registered trademarks for the VERIMARK Marks, including U.S. Registration Nos. 3,742,618, 4,105,233, and 5,489,701, all registered on the Principal Register of the USPTO.
68. Without the consent, authorization, or license of VHG, CVR has used in commerce, and continues to use in commerce, reproductions, counterfeits, copies, or colorable imitations of VHG's registered VERIMARK Marks — specifically, the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" (word mark) and the "VR Verimark" (stylized logo) — in connection with the sale, distribution, offering for sale, and advertising of hospitality services, including luxury resort accommodations, dining services, concierge services, and related hospitality services.
69. CVR's marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" incorporate VHG's VERIMARK mark in its entirety and are confusingly similar to VHG's registered VERIMARK Marks in sight, sound, meaning, and overall commercial impression.
70. CVR's use of the infringing marks in connection with identical hospitality services, offered to the same class of consumers through the same or overlapping trade channels in the same geographic markets, is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive consumers as to the source, origin, sponsorship, affiliation, or approval of CVR's services, and as to whether CVR's services are affiliated with, connected to, or endorsed by VHG.
71. As detailed in Paragraphs 52 through 55 above, CVR's use of the infringing marks has in fact already caused actual consumer confusion in the marketplace, as documented through twenty-three (23) instances of actual confusion identified between March 2024 and June 2025.
72. Application of the factors set forth in Frehling Enterprises, Inc. v. International Select Group, Inc., 192 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 1999), weighs overwhelmingly in favor of a finding of likelihood of confusion, including: (a) the strength and fame of VHG's VERIMARK Marks; (b) the high degree of similarity between VHG's marks and CVR's marks; (c) the identity of the parties' services; (d) the overlap in trade channels and classes of consumers; (e) the geographic proximity of the parties' operations; (f) evidence of actual consumer confusion; (g) CVR's intent in adopting the infringing marks; and (h) the degree of care exercised by the relevant consumers.
73. CVR's acts constitute trademark infringement in violation of Section 32(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1).
74. CVR's infringement has been willful and deliberate, as evidenced by: (a) CVR's adoption and use of marks incorporating "VERIMARK" more than sixteen years after VHG's first use and more than fourteen years after VHG's earliest federal registration; (b) CVR's continued and expanded use of the infringing marks after receiving two detailed cease-and-desist demands from VHG and its counsel; (c) CVR's actual knowledge of VHG's prior rights and the fame of the VERIMARK Marks; and (d) CVR's filing of a federal trademark application for "VERIMARK RESORTS" notwithstanding VHG's prior registrations and protests.
75. As a direct and proximate result of CVR's infringing acts, VHG has suffered and continues to suffer damages, including lost profits, loss of goodwill, dilution of the distinctive quality of its marks, and diversion of customers and revenues. VHG is entitled to recover its actual damages, CVR's profits attributable to the infringement, enhanced damages for willful infringement, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, all pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
76. VHG is further entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive relief pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116.
COUNT II: FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION AND FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
77. VHG incorporates and realleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 76 above as though fully restated herein.
78. CVR has used in commerce words, terms, names, symbols, and devices — specifically, the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" and the "VR Verimark" stylized logo — and combinations thereof, and false designations of origin, false or misleading descriptions of fact, and false or misleading representations of fact, which are likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of CVR with VHG, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of CVR's goods, services, or commercial activities by VHG.
79. CVR's use of marks that incorporate VHG's famous VERIMARK mark in its entirety, for identical services, in overlapping geographic markets, through the same trade channels, creates a false impression in the minds of consumers that CVR and its resort properties are affiliated with, endorsed by, or in some way connected to VHG. This false impression is precisely the type of consumer deception that Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act was enacted to prevent.
80. CVR's acts constitute unfair competition and false designation of origin in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
81. As a direct and proximate result of CVR's acts of unfair competition and false designation of origin, VHG has suffered and continues to suffer damages, including lost profits, loss of goodwill, and diversion of customers and revenues. VHG is entitled to recover its actual damages, CVR's profits, enhanced damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), and to obtain preliminary and permanent injunctive relief pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116.
COUNT III: FEDERAL TRADEMARK DILUTION (15 U.S.C. § 1125(c))
82. VHG incorporates and realleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 81 above as though fully restated herein.
83. VHG's VERIMARK Marks are famous within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(2)(A). In evaluating the fame of the VERIMARK Marks, the Court should consider, among other factors: (a) the duration, extent, and geographic reach of VHG's advertising and publicity of the VERIMARK Marks, including over $142 million in annual marketing expenditures and a comprehensive multi-channel marketing program covering television, digital, print, social media, and travel industry channels; (b) the amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of services offered under the VERIMARK Marks, including approximately $1.87 billion in annual revenue generated across seventy-four branded properties in eighteen states and the Caribbean; (c) the extent of actual recognition of the VERIMARK Marks by the general consuming public, as demonstrated by VHG's 2.8-million-member loyalty program, 1.4 million Northpoint Services Inc. followers, millions of annual website visitors, and widespread unsolicited media coverage; and (d) whether the VERIMARK Marks are registered on the Principal Register, which they are, with at least two registrations having achieved incontestable status.
84. VHG's VERIMARK Marks became famous well before CVR's first use in commerce on or about March 1, 2024. VHG has used the VERIMARK Marks continuously in interstate commerce since September 3, 2007, and has achieved fame through more than seventeen years of extensive, continuous, and exclusive use, massive advertising and promotional investments, and the consistently high quality of its hospitality services.
85. CVR commenced its use of "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" in commerce after VHG's VERIMARK Marks became famous. CVR's use of marks that incorporate VHG's famous VERIMARK mark in its entirety for identical hospitality services is likely to cause dilution by blurring of the distinctive quality of VHG's famous VERIMARK Marks. CVR's use creates an association arising from the similarity between CVR's marks and VHG's marks that impairs the distinctiveness of VHG's marks by weakening the strong and exclusive association between the VERIMARK name and VHG's hospitality services.
86. In determining the likelihood of dilution by blurring, the Court should consider, among other factors, the following under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(2)(B): (a) the degree of similarity between CVR's marks and VHG's VERIMARK Marks, which is extremely high, as CVR's marks incorporate VHG's mark in its entirety; (b) the degree of inherent and acquired distinctiveness of VHG's VERIMARK Marks, which is very high, as "VERIMARK" is a coined, fanciful term with no meaning outside its association with VHG's services; (c) the extent to which VHG is engaged in substantially exclusive use of the VERIMARK Marks, which it has been for over seventeen years; (d) the degree of recognition of VHG's VERIMARK Marks; (e) whether CVR intended to create an association with VHG's VERIMARK Marks; and (f) any actual association between CVR's marks and VHG's VERIMARK Marks, which is demonstrated by the twenty-three documented instances of actual consumer confusion.
87. CVR's use of marks incorporating "VERIMARK" is also likely to cause dilution by tarnishment of VHG's famous VERIMARK Marks if CVR's services are of inferior quality or if CVR's business practices harm the reputation associated with VHG's marks. Because VHG has no control over the quality of CVR's services, any negative consumer experiences at CVR's properties are likely to be attributed to VHG, thereby tarnishing the favorable associations and prestige of VHG's VERIMARK Marks.
88. CVR's acts constitute trademark dilution in violation of Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
89. VHG is entitled to injunctive relief under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(1) to prevent further dilution of its famous VERIMARK Marks. Because CVR's diluting use has been willful, VHG is also entitled to the remedies set forth in 15 U.S.C. §§ 1117(a) and 1125(c)(2), including damages, CVR's profits, costs, and reasonable attorneys' fees.
COUNT IV: FLORIDA COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
90. VHG incorporates and realleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 89 above as though fully restated herein.
91. VHG has common law trademark rights in the VERIMARK Marks based on its first use in commerce on September 3, 2007, and its continuous and exclusive use of the VERIMARK Marks in commerce since that date. Under Florida common law, VHG's longstanding prior use of the VERIMARK Marks in connection with hospitality services entitles it to protection against the use of confusingly similar marks by later-entering competitors.
92. CVR's use of the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" in connection with identical hospitality services — luxury coastal resort accommodations — in VHG's core southeastern United States geographic markets constitutes trademark infringement under the common law of the State of Florida.
93. CVR's use of the infringing marks is likely to cause, and has in fact caused, confusion, mistake, and deception among consumers as to the source, origin, sponsorship, affiliation, or approval of CVR's services. The same factual evidence of likelihood of confusion and actual confusion supporting VHG's federal claims applies with equal force to this common law claim.
94. As a direct and proximate result of CVR's common law trademark infringement, VHG has suffered and continues to suffer damages, including lost profits, loss of goodwill, diversion of customers and revenues, and harm to the distinctive quality and reputation of its VERIMARK Marks.
COUNT V: VIOLATION OF THE FLORIDA DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES ACT (Fla. Stat. § 501.204)
95. VHG incorporates and realleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 94 above as though fully restated herein.
96. CVR's use of the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS" and "VR Verimark" in connection with the marketing, promotion, advertising, offering for sale, and sale of hospitality services in the State of Florida constitutes an unfair method of competition, unconscionable act or practice, and/or an unfair or deceptive act or practice in the conduct of trade or commerce within the State of Florida, in violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Fla. Stat. § 501.204.
97. CVR's use of marks confusingly similar to VHG's well-known VERIMARK Marks for identical services in the same market is likely to mislead, deceive, and confuse consumers, and has in fact misled, deceived, and confused consumers, as to the source, origin, sponsorship, affiliation, or connection of CVR's services with VHG.
98. CVR's deceptive and unfair trade practices have caused and continue to cause consumer confusion, deception, and injury within the State of Florida, thereby harming both the consuming public and VHG.
99. VHG has suffered actual damages as a result of CVR's violations of FDUTPA, including, without limitation, lost profits, diversion of customers and revenues, and harm to VHG's goodwill and reputation. VHG is entitled to recover its actual damages, declaratory and injunctive relief, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to Fla. Stat. §§ 501.211 and 501.2105.
VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Verimark Hospitality Group Inc. respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor and against Defendant Coral Verimark Resorts LLC and grant the following relief:
1. Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief. An order and judgment, both preliminary and permanent, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116 and this Court's inherent equitable powers, enjoining Defendant Coral Verimark Resorts LLC, its officers (including Rafael J. Medina and Gabriela N. Serrano), directors, members, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, successors, assigns, and all persons acting in concert or participation with any of them, from:
(a) Using the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS," "VR Verimark," or any other mark, name, term, symbol, device, or combination thereof that is confusingly similar to VHG's VERIMARK Marks, or that incorporates the term "VERIMARK" or any colorable imitation thereof, in connection with the advertising, marketing, promotion, sale, distribution, or offering for sale of hospitality services or any other goods or services;
(b) Operating, maintaining, or in any way utilizing the website located at www.verimarkresortsgroup.com, the Northpoint Services Inc. handle @verimarkresortsofficial, or any other domain name, website, social media account, or online platform incorporating the term "VERIMARK" or any confusingly similar term;
(c) Using any trade name, corporate name, limited liability company name, d/b/a, business identifier, or assumed name incorporating the term "VERIMARK" or any confusingly similar term;
(d) Otherwise infringing VHG's rights in the VERIMARK Marks, engaging in unfair competition with VHG, diluting the distinctive quality of VHG's VERIMARK Marks, or committing any other act that is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception as to the source, origin, sponsorship, affiliation, or approval of any services offered by CVR;
(e) Assisting, aiding, or abetting any other person or entity in engaging in any of the activities described in subparagraphs (a) through (d) above.
2. Actual Damages / Lost Profits. An award of VHG's actual damages, including lost profits, in an amount to be proven at trial, but estimated to include at least $2.1 million in diverted bookings for calendar year 2024 alone, plus additional amounts for calendar year 2025 and any subsequent periods of infringement, all pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
3. Defendant's Profits. In the alternative to, or in addition to, an award of VHG's actual damages, an accounting and disgorgement of all of CVR's profits attributable to its infringement of VHG's VERIMARK Marks, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a). Based on CVR's estimated combined revenue for calendar years 2024 and 2025 of approximately $11.1 million and an estimated profit margin of approximately eighteen percent (18%), CVR's profits attributable to the infringement are estimated at approximately $2.0 million.
4. Enhanced / Treble Damages. An award of treble damages, in an amount up to three (3) times CVR's profits (i.e., up to approximately $6.0 million), or such other enhancement of damages as the Court deems just and appropriate in light of CVR's willful and deliberate infringement, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
5. Reasonable Royalty Alternative. In the further alternative, if the Court does not award actual damages or CVR's profits, an award of a reasonable royalty calculated at five percent (5%) of CVR's gross revenue, which would amount to approximately $555,000 based on CVR's estimated combined gross revenue of $11.1 million for calendar years 2024 and 2025, as an adequate measure of damages.
6. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. An award of VHG's reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), on the ground that this is an "exceptional case" warranting such an award given CVR's willful, deliberate, and bad-faith infringement, and pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 501.2105 in connection with VHG's FDUTPA claim.
7. Cancellation of CVR's Pending Trademark Application. An order directing the Commissioner for Trademarks of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to refuse registration of, or to cancel, CVR's pending U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 98/432,117 for the mark "VERIMARK RESORTS" in International Class 043.
8. Domain and Social Media Transfer / Disabling. An order requiring CVR to immediately transfer to VHG, or permanently disable, the domain name www.verimarkresortsgroup.com and the Northpoint Services Inc. handle @verimarkresortsofficial, and any other domain names, social media accounts, or online platforms incorporating the term "VERIMARK" or any confusingly similar term that are owned, controlled, or operated by CVR.
9. Destruction / Recall of Infringing Materials. An order requiring CVR to deliver up for destruction, or to destroy under oath, all materials in CVR's possession, custody, or control bearing the marks "VERIMARK RESORTS," "VR Verimark," or any other mark confusingly similar to VHG's VERIMARK Marks, including signage, stationery, business cards, promotional materials, advertisements, and packaging.
10. Such Other and Further Relief. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and equitable under the circumstances.
VII. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
100. Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Verimark Hospitality Group Inc. hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues and claims so triable in this action.
VIII. VERIFICATION
VERIFICATION
I, Leonard Yee, hereby declare and state as follows:
1. I am the Vice President of Brand Protection of Verimark Hospitality Group Inc. ("VHG"), the Plaintiff in this action. I have been employed by VHG in this capacity since March 2017, and in this role I am responsible for the protection, enforcement, and management of VHG's trademark portfolio worldwide, including the VERIMARK family of marks at issue in this action.
2. I am authorized by VHG to verify this Verified Complaint on behalf of VHG, and I make this verification based on my personal knowledge and upon inquiry of other persons within VHG who have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein.
3. I have reviewed the foregoing Verified Complaint and am familiar with its contents. The factual allegations set forth in the Verified Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry.
4. I have personal knowledge of VHG's ownership and registration of the VERIMARK Marks, VHG's long and continuous use of the VERIMARK Marks in interstate commerce since Septemb