On Monday in the Northern District of Georgia, Any Test Franchising filed a complaint against Diagnostics Pathology Consultants and two individuals, alleging trademark infringement and breach of the parties’ franchise agreement.
Any Test Franchising provides services for drug, medical, and pregnancy testing, operating more than 180 franchises across the country. It holds U.S. Trademark Nos. 3588117, 4789954, and 5907637, all covering the Any Lab Test Now franchise logo. According to the complaint, the plaintiff has used the first two trademarks-in-suit for more than a decade and the third since 2018.
The plaintiff and the defendants entered into a franchise agreement in July 2010 that gave the defendants the right to operate an Any Lab Test Now franchise until July 2020, when they would no longer be able to use the trademarks-in-suit, according to the complaint.
“After the Agreement expired, Defendants chose to not comply with their post-termination obligations under the Agreement, including continuing to use Plaintiff’s Trademarks and failing to return items which Defendants were required to return to Plaintiff,” the plaintiff alleged.
Accordingly, on Sept. 25, 2020, the plaintiff sent a letter to notify the defendants that they were no longer complying with the agreement terms and urged them to correct their alleged conduct, such as through returning client lists, records, files, and instructions, among other items, to the plaintiff and through ceasing to use the plaintiff’s trademarks.
The plaintiff claimed that the defendants still have not ceased to use the trademarks, continuing to answer their telephones with “Any Lab Test Now—how can I help you” and using the trademarks on their signage, customer forms, pamphlets, and receipts, the complaint said.
“Defendants have used Plaintiff‘s Trademarks to falsely associate themselves with Plaintiff, to falsely indicate that Plaintiff is the source of Defendants’ services; and to falsely suggest a relationship between Plaintiff and Defendants which hasn’t existed since Defendants stopped being franchisees of Plaintiff when the Agreement expired,” the complaint alleged.
The formal causes of action against the defendants are trademark infringement, unfair competition, violation of the Georgia Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and breach of contract. The plaintiff requests injunctive relief to prevent the defendants’ alleged conduct and compensatory damages, among other relief.
The plaintiff is represented by Shipe Dosik Law.
