LegalZoom Wants New ‘Trademarkia’ Complaint Dismissed

An amended complaint against LegalZoom.com Inc. for infringing LegalForce Inc.'s “Trademarkia” trademark should be dismissed, LegalZoom argued April 4.

As in the original complaint, LegalForce failed to show any actual injury from LegalZoom’s actions, LegalZoom argued.

LegalZoom allegedly bought the domain “LegalZoomTrademarkia.com” and used it to divert traffic from LegalForce’s Trademarkia.com to LegalZoom.com. The Northern District of California dismissed LegalForce’s initial complaint because it failed to trace its decline in revenue—which began two years before LegalZoom began using “Trademarkia"—to LegalZoom’s actions.

LegalZoom argued LegalForce’s amended complaint should be dismissed with prejudice. LegalForce lacked standing because it again failed to allege an injury that could be traced to LegalZoom’s conduct, it said.

LegalForce didn’t allege that any consumer had actually been to LegalZoom’s site. And it was “nonsensical and implausible” to argue that a customer looking for Trademarkia would first type LegalZoom’s name, it said.

“In short, Plaintiff’s conclusion that it suffered reputational and economic harm relies on leaps of logic and speculation,” LegalZoom said.

And once again LegalForce couldn’t show that its decline in revenue was related to LegalZoom’s actions, because the decline began before the alleged infringement.

There was also no likelihood of confusion between the websites, LegalZoom said. LegalZoom’s site was unambiguously affiliated with LegalZoom, and there was no evidence LegalZoom’s site would misdirect customers looking for LegalForce’s site, it said.

Cooley LLP represents LegalZoom.

The case is LegalForce, Inc. v. LegalZoom.com, Inc., N.D. Cal., No. 3:18-cv-07274, motion to dismiss filed 4/4/19.