Opinion
2:20-cv-01226-TLN-CKD
07-01-2021
SOURDOUGH & CO., INC., Plaintiff, v. WCSD, INC., a California corporation; GSD FOODS, INC., a California corporation; GURMINDER BHATIA, an individual; DAVINDER SINGH, an individual; POWERGLIDE HOLDINGS, LLC, a California limited liability company; KALDEEP UPPAL, an individual; KARNDEEP UPPAL, an individual; SD-FOLSOM, INC., a California corporation; and Does 1-25, Defendants. WCSD, INC., a California corporation, Counter-Claimant, v. SOURDOUGH & CO., INC., a California corporation, Counter-Defendant.
ORDER
Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Counter-Defendant Sourdough & Co., Inc.'s (“Sourdough & Co.”) Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim. (ECF No. 18.) Counter-Claimant WCSD, Inc. (“WCSD”) has filed a statement of non-opposition. (ECF No. 25.) For the reasons set forth herein, the Court GRANTS Sourdough & Co., Inc.'s Motion.
On June 17, 2020, Sourdough & Co. filed the instant action against WCSD and Defendants GSD Foods, Inc., Gurminder Bhatia (“Bhatia”), Davinder Singh, Powerglide Holdings, LLC, Kaldeep Uppal, Karndeep Uppal, and SD-Folsom, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging various federal and state law claims for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising. (See ECF No. 1.) Sourdough & Co. alleges all Defendants except WCSD are former licensees of trademarks owned by Sourdough & Co., who “were wrongfully induced to terminate their license agreements by way of tort[i]ous and illegal conduct organized and executed by Defendant Bhatia, who used false and defamatory statements about [Sourdough & Co.] to induce [them] to become licensees of WCSD, or its affiliates, utilizing the name and mark ‘West Coast Sourdough.'” (ECF No. 1 at ¶¶ 14-15.)
On August 26, 2020, WCSD filed an Answer and Counterclaim against Sourdough & Co., alleging claims for: (1) declaratory judgment of non-infringement concerning use of the “West Coast Sourdough” trademark; (2) cancellation of Sourdough & Co.'s federal trademark registration for “Sourdough & Co.” (Reg. No. 5343030); (3) cancellation of Sourdough & Co.'s federal trademark registration for its design mark (Reg. No. 5370126); (4) declaratory judgment as to Sourdough & Co.'s sale of unregistered franchises; (5) unfair business practices and unfair competition in violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200-17210; and (6) interference with prospective economic advantage. (See ECF No. 15 at 12-17.)
WCSD labels both its unfair business practices and unfair competition counterclaim as well as its interference with prospective economic advantage counterclaim as the “Fifth Cause of Action.” (ECF No. 15 at 16-17.) However, since both claims have separate headers and allege different causes of action, the Court construes WCSD's interference with prospective economic advantage counterclaim as its sixth counterclaim.
On September 16, 2020, Sourdough & Co. filed a motion to dismiss WCSD's fifth counterclaim alleging unfair business practices and unfair competition in violation of California's unfair competition law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200-17210. (ECF No. 18.) Sourdough & Co. argues WCSD fails to meet the standing requirements of the UCL, as WCSD “does not plead facts showing any direct dealings with Sourdough [& Co.], nor does the Counterclaim demonstrate any actual injury suffered, including lost money or property due to Sourdough [& Co.'s] purported unfair competition.” (ECF No. 18-1 at 3-4.) Sourdough & Co. further argues WCSD fails to allege “it has lost customers or economic opportunity, nor does [WCSD] allege that it has lost prospective franchisees or business opportunities because of Sourdough [& Co.]” (Id. at 6.) On October 29, 2020, WCSD filed a statement of non-opposition. (ECF No. 25.)
With its statement of non-opposition, WCSD implicitly concedes the arguments made by Sourdough & Co. in its motion to dismiss. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Sourdough & Co.'s motion to dismiss WCSD's fifth counterclaim. (ECF No. 18.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.