ESTTA Tracking number: ESTTA1489624
`Filing date: 01/13/2026
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`Proceeding no. 91301327
`Party Plaintiff
`UDA Technologies, Inc.
`Correspondence
`address
`JEFFREY S DIXON
`LAW OFFICES OF KONRAD SHERINIAN LLC
`1755 PARK ST STE 200
`NAPERVILLE, IL 60563
`UNITED STATES
`Primary email: jdixon@sherinianlaw.net
`Secondary email(s): ksherinian@sherinianlaw.net, courts@sherinianlaw.net,
`pto@sherinianlaw.net
`630-318-2606
`Submission Other Motions/Submissions
`Filer's name Jeffrey S. Dixon
`Filer's email jdixon@sherinianlaw.net
`Signature /Jeffrey S. Dixon/
`Date 01/13/2026
`Attachments 1-main-Complaint.pdf(385492 bytes )
`1-1.pdf(501495 bytes )
`17-Answer.pdf(179977 bytes )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 1
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`SPECIALTY PUBLISHING COMPANY, )
`)
` Plaintiff, ) Case No. 25- cv-3873
`)
`v. )
`)
`UDA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., )
`)
` Defendant. )
`
`COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES
`
`The Plaintiff, SPECIALTY PUBLISHING CO, by and through its undersigned counsel,
`hereby files its Complaint against the Defendant, UDA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., (hereinafter
`referred to as “UDA”) and alleges, as follows:
`Introduction
` This action arises from UDA ’s willful infringement of Plaintiff’s trademark. Specialty
`Publishing Company, a known leader and innovator in the construction industry owns the
`Constructech trademark and awards deserving companies its “top products” award. UDA won this
`award between 2008- 2012. UDA, however, took its award and modified the trademarked logo to
`use in its marketing and advertising to generate sales. Defendant's misrepresentation extends
`beyond the mere unauthorized use of Plaintiff's trademarked logo. UDA has compounded its
`wrongdoing by fabricating a purported endorsement from Constructech, further leveraging
`Plaintiff's esteemed reputation for its own commercial gain. UDA was put on notice of its
`violations and unlawful activity but decided to ignore the notice and has continued to use the
`modified logo and fabricated quote on its website. This action seeks to hold UDA responsible for
`its willful violations and properly compensate Plaintiff.
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 2
`Jurisdictional Allegations
`
`1. This is a civil action against the Defendants for trademark infringement,
`counterfeiting, and false designation of origin and unfair competition, under the Lanham Act (15
`U.S.C. § 1051 et. seq.).
`2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims in this action that relate
`to trademark infringement, counterfeiting, and false designation of origin and unfair competition
`pursuant to the provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 1121 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`3. Defendant used the trademark at issue in interstate commerce.
`4. Defendant has engaged in the sale and distribution of software bearing the
`infringing mark within Illinois through its website, “https://store.udatechnologies.com”, and has
`offered and sold said software to consumers residing throughout the United States.
`5. Additionally, Defendant advertises its software on its website, which is accessible
`to consumers nationwide, and has shipped software bearing the infringing mark via common
`carriers that traverse state lines. Such activities constitute 'use in commerce' as defined by the
`Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1127, and have a direct and substantial effect on interstate commerce,
`as they involve the sale and transportation of goods across state lines and the use of a nationally
`accessible medium for advertising and sales.
`6. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the State law claims pursuant to 28
`USC § 1367.
`Venue
`
`7. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) in that this
`Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because a substantial part of the events giving
`rise to these claims occurred in this district, the parties’ relationship commenced in this district,
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 2 of 12 PageID #:2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 3
`and Defendant has sufficient contacts within the district.
`8. Venue is also proper in this district because the parties’ relationship began in this
`district. Specifically, when Plaintiff issued five awards to Defendant between 2008-2012 it was
`based and located in Illinois.
`9. Finally, Defendant has purposefully availed itself to this district through its
`national marketing and advertising on its website and engaging with an Illinois Company.
`Parties
`
`10. Specialty Publishing Company is an Illinois Corporation incorporated in the State
`of Illinois. In 2022, Specialty moved its principal place of business from DuPage County, Carol
`Stream, Illinois to South Carolina. Specialty Publishing is the registered owner of the
`Constructech trademarks.
`11. UDA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., (hereinafter referred to as “UDA”) is a
`Corporation incorporated in the State of Alabama with a principal place of business in Alabama.
`Facts Common to All Counts
`12. UDA Technologies is a leading provider of construction technologies, software,
`application development, and architectural services for construction professionals in the United
`States, Canada, and 75 countries worldwide.
`13. Specialty Publishing is a multimedia house that provides content across a variety
`of mediums—digital, podcast/radio, print, events, consulting, and much more.
`14. Specialty Publishing has created a respected reputation for itself over decades of
`work within the construction industry.
`15. The founders of Specialty Publishing have been recognized as an industry leader
`and expert in over 50 publications.
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 3 of 12 PageID #:3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 4
`16. Specialty Publishing produces a podcast with a large following.
`17. Plaintiff is the rightful owner of USA trademarks, which are registered on the
`Principal Register and have become incontestable within the meaning of Section 15 of the Lanham
`Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1065. The following is a list of Plaintiff’s federally registered trademarks:
`Mark Reg. No. Reg. Date Goods
`
`5389756 Jan. 30, 2018 Magazines in the field of emerging
`technologies in construction,
`technology and product development
`trends and business in the field of
`construction
`
`5389756 Jan. 30, 2018 Arranging and conducting business
`conferences in the field of emerging
`technologies and technology and
`product development trends
`
`5389756 Jan. 30, 2018 Providing on-line magazines in the
`field of emerging technologies in
`construction, technology and
`product development trends and
`business in the field of construction;
`arranging and conducting
`educational conferences in the field
`of emerging technologies in
`construction, and technology and
`product development trends in the
`field of construction
`
`5389756 Jan. 30, 2018 Providing a website featuring
`information on emerging
`technologies and trends, namely,
`product development technology and
`trends
`
`18. Plaintiff used the trademark before Defendant.
`19. Plaintiff continues to use the trademark.
`20. Between 2008 and 2012, Defendant was a recipient of Constructech’s Top
`Products award.
`
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 4 of 12 PageID #:4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 5
`21. When presented with the award, Plaintiff provided Defendant with a badge of the
`award as pictured below:
`
`22. Defendant modified the above-pictured award by deleting the year of the award.
`23. Defendant modified the award as pictured below:
`
`24. Defendant’s website is riddled with the logo of the modified award.
`
`
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 5 of 12 PageID #:5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 6
`25. Defendant used and continues to use the modified logo in marketing its products.
`
`26. Defendant again modified Plaintiff’s logo by adding the 2017 year as pictured
`below. Defendant did not receive an award in 2017, and Plaintiff never authorized Defendant to
`modify the logo.
`
`27. In addition to modifying and publishing the modified badge, Defendant falsely
`claims to have won Constructech’s Top Product award twenty-four (24) times.
`
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 6 of 12 PageID #:6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 7
`28. Additionally, Defendant has created a quote purporting Plaintiff’s endorsement
`and support of Defendant.
`29. The quote at issue has been fabricated by Defendant.
`30. The quote has been published on Defendant’s website and is being used as a
`marketing and advertising tool. (See below image).
`
`31. Defendant has used Plaintiff’s likeness and industry influence to create a false
`claim that Plaintiff has sponsored Defendant.
`32. Defendant has leveraged Plaintiff’s publicity and expertise to market and sell its
`products.
`33. The fabricated quote, strategically displayed on Defendant's website, falsely
`implies that Specialty Publishing Company has explicitly endorsed UDA Technologies'
`offerings, stating “…the best the industry has to offer.”
`34. This statement is a complete fabrication, crafted by UDA to mislead consumers
`into believing that UDA's products have received the explicit approval and recommendation of
`Constructech.
`35. This act of fabricating a testimonial is a particularly egregious violation, as it not
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 7 of 12 PageID #:7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 8
`only infringes upon Plaintiff's rights but also actively deceives the market. Consumers rely on the
`credibility of endorsements from reputable sources like Constructech, and UDA's false claim
`exploits this trust for its own advantage.
`36. On August 1, 2024, Plaintiff notified Defendant of its infringement and illegal use
`and demanded it immediately cease to do so.
`37. Defendant ignored Plaintiff’s notice and has continued to willfully infringe on
`Plaintiff’s trademark.
`COUNT I
`Trademark Infringement
`
`38. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation of this Complaint as
`though fully set forth herein.
`39. Plaintiff owns the Constructech design Trademark.
`40. Plaintiff was the first to use the trademark.
`41. Plaintiff’s design is a valid trademark
`42. Defendant used the design in interstate commerce.
`43. Defendant used the design trademark in a manner that is likely to confuse and
`deceive the sponsorship and approval of Defendant’s products.
`44. Upon information and belief, Defendant profited from infringing on Plaintiff’s
`trademark.
`45. The value and reputation of Plaintiff’s trademark has been diluted as a result of
`Defendant's infringement.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 8 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 9
`COUNT II
`False Advertising Under Lanham Act
`
`46. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation of this Complaint as
`though fully set forth herein.
`47. Defendant made false and misleading statements of fact in a commercial
`advertisement about its products, alleging that Plaintiff has sponsored and approved Defendant’s
`products.
`48. The statement actually deceived or had the tendency to deceive a substantial
`segment of Defendant’s audience
`49. The deception was likely to influence the purchasing decisions of consumers.
`50. Defendant’s products are advertised across state lines and Defendant’s activity
`have a substantial effect of Plaintiff’s business.
`51. Plaintiff has been or is likely to be injured as a result of the false statement.
`Including but not limited to loss of goodwill and reputation.
`COUNT III
`Violation of Illinois Right to Publicity Act
`
`52. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation of this Complaint as
`though fully set forth herein.
`53. Plaintiff’s publicity and industry expertise is well known within the industry and
`Plaintiff’s endorsement goes a long way building good will.
`54. Defendant fabricated a quote claiming that Plaintiff said “…the best the industry
`has to offer.”
`55. Defendant appropriated the likeness of Plaintiff.
`56. Plaintiff did not provide consent to the use of fabricated quote.
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 9 of 12 PageID #:9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 10
`57. Defendant used the fabricated quote for a commercial benefit.
`58. Defendant benefited from the use of the fabricated quote.
`59. The damage caused by this fabricated quote is substantial. It undermines the
`integrity of Constructech's endorsements, erodes consumer trust, and unfairly advantages UDA
`in the marketplace. Plaintiff has invested significant resources in building its reputation as a
`reliable authority in the construction industry, and UDA's actions directly threaten to tarnish that
`reputation.
`COUNT IV
`Violation of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act
`
`60. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation of this Complaint as
`though fully set forth herein.
`61. Defendant engaged in deceptive and fraudulent marketing, advertising, and sale to
`Plaintiff’s detriment.
`62. Defendant’s deceptive and fraudulent acts, include creating false quotes,
`modifying Plaintiff's trademark, and false claims of support.
`63. The deceptive and fraudulent acts occurred in the course of conduct involving
`trade and commerce.
`64. Plaintiff suffered damages to its reputation and trademark as a result.
`COUNT V
`Unjust Enrichment
`
`65. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation of this Complaint as
`though fully set forth herein.
`66. Defendant unjustly gained financial gain and reputation by its unauthorized use of
`Plaintiff’s likeness.
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 11
`67. Defendant gained financial gain and reputation by its unauthorized use of
`Plaintiff’s trademark.
`68. Defendant gained financial gain and reputation by its unauthorized modification
`of Plaintiff’s trademark.
`69. Defendant’s unjust enrichment is and was to Plaintiff’s detriment.
`70. Defendant’s retention of the financial benefit violates the fundamental principles
`of justice, equity, and good conscience.
`71. It is unjust to allow Defendant to retain its unlawful retention of the financial
`benefit.
`Prayer for Relief
`72. An Order requiring Defendant to remove any and all false claims from
`Defendant’s website, marketing materials, and all other materials claiming that UDA
`Technologies has won Constructech’s Top Products awards outside the five awards Defendant
`won in 2008-2012.
`73. An Order requiring Defendant to remove the fabricated quote from Defendant’s
`website, marketing materials, and all other materials.
`74. An Order requiring Defendant to cease using the modified Top Products logo and
`remove it from all platforms where it is currently displayed.
`75. Compensatory Damages:
`a. Profits Defendant made as a result of its infringement;
`b. Reasonably royalties for the time Defendant infringed on the trademark;
`c. Damages for Defendant’s violation of the Illinois Right to Publicity Act;
`d. Attorney’s fees for Defendant’s willful infringement;
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 12
`e. Costs incurred by Plaintiff to protect its trademark;
`f. Treble damages for Defendant's willful infringement;
`g. Reasonable statutory damages;
`h. Punitive damages; and
`i. Any other relief the court deemed reasonable and necessary
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted:
`
`
`/s/ Matthew Amarin
`Matthew Amarin
`Law Offices of Haytham Faraj, PLLC
`1935 W. Belmont Avenue
`Chicago, IL 60657
`312-635-0800
`Matthew@Farajlaw.com
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ILND 44 (Rev. 08/23) CIVIL COVER SHEET
`The ILND 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except
`as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in Sep tember 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
`purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (See instructions on next page of this form.)
`I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS
`(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
`(Except in U.S. plaintiff cases) (In U.S. plaintiff cases only)
` Note: In land condemnation cases, use the location of the tract of land involved.
`(c) Attorneys (firm name, address, and telephone number) Attorneys (If Known)
`II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Check one box, only.) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (For Diversity Cases Only.)
`(Check one box, only for plaintiff and one box for defendant.)
`1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
`Plaintiff (U.S. Government not a party.) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place of
`Business in This State 4 4
`2 U.S. Government 4 Diversit y Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incor porated and Principal Place 5 5
`Defendant (Indicate citizenship of parties in Item III.) of Business in Another State
`Citizen or Subject of a
`Forei
`gn Country 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6
`IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Check one box, only.)
`CONTRACT TORTS PRISONER PETITIONS LABOR OTHER STATUTES
`110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY 510 Motions to Vacate
` Sentence
`710 Fair Labor Standards
` Act 375 False Claims Act
`120 Marine 365 Personal Injury -
`Product Liability
`530 General 720 Labor/Management 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
` 3729 (a))
`130 Miller Act
`367 Health Care/ Pharmaceutical
` Personal Injury
` Product Liabilit
`y
`535 Death Penalty Relations 400 State Reapportionment
`Other: 740 Railway Labor Act 410 Antitrust
`140 Negotiable Instrument 368 Asbestos Personal 751 Family and Medical 430 Banks and Banking
`150 Recovery of Overpayment Injury Product Leave Act 450 Commerce
` & Enforcement of Jud gment Liability
`540 Mandamus & Other
`550 Civil Rights
`555 Prison Condition
`560 Civil Detainee -
`790 Other Labor Litigation 460 Deportation
`151 Medicare Act 791 Employee Retirement 470 Racketeer Influenced
`152 Recovery of Defaulted
` Student Loan
` (Excludes Veterans)
`PERSONAL INJURY
`310 Airplane
`315 Airplane Product Liability
`320 Assault, Libel & Slander
`330 Federal Employers'
`Liability
`340 Marine
`345 Marine Product Liability
`350 Motor Vehicle
`355 Motor Vehicle Product
` PERSONAL PROPERTY
`
`Conditions
` of Confineme nt
` Income Security Act and Corrupt
` Or
`ganizations
`370 Other Fraud 480 Consumer Credit
`153 Recovery of Veteran’s
` Benefits 371 Truth in Lending PROPERTY RIGHTS 485 Telephone Consumer
`160 Stockholders’ Suits
` Liability
`360 Other Personal Injury
`362 Personal Injury - Medical
`Malpractice
`380 Other Personal Protection Act (TCPA)
`190 Other Contract Property Damage 490 Cable/Sat TV
`195 Contract Product Liability 385 Property Damage 850 Securities/Commodities/
`196 Franchise Product Liability
`820 Copyright
`830 Patent
`835 Patent - Abbreviated
` New Drug Application
`840 Trademark
`880 Defend Trade Secrets
`Act of 2016 (DTSA)
` Exchan
`ge
`890 Other Statutory Actions
`891 A gricultural Arts
`REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS BANKRUPTCY FORFEITURE/PENALTY SOCIAL SECURITY 893 Environmental Matters
`422 Appeal 28 USC 158 625 Drug Related Seizure 861 HIA (1395ff) 895 Freedom of Information
`423 Withdrawal of Property
` 21 USC 881 862 Black Lung (923) Act
` 28 USC 157 690 Other 863 DIWC/DIWW 896 Arbitration
` (405(g)) 899 Administrative
` Procedure
` 210 Land Condemnation
` 220 Foreclosure
` 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
` 240 Torts to Land
` 2 45 Tort Product Liability
`IMMIGRATION 864 SSID Title XVI Act/Review or A ppeal of
`462 Naturalization 865 RSI (405(g)) Agency Decision
`440 Other Civil Rights
`441 Voting
`442 Employment
`443 Housing/Accommodations
`445 Amer. w/ Disabilities -
`Employment
`446 Amer. w/Disabilities - Application 950 Constitutionality of
`463 Habeas Corpus – FEDERAL TAXES State Statutes Other
` 448 Education Alien Detainee 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
` (Prisoner Petition) or Defendant
`465 Other Immigration 871 IRS—Third Party
` Actions 26 USC 7609
`V. ORIGIN (Check one box, only.)
`1 Original
`Proceeding
` 2 Removed from
`State Court
` 3 Remanded from
`Appellate Court
` 5 Transferred
` from Another
` District
` (specify)
` 6 Multidistrict
`Litigation -
`Transfer
` 8 Multidistrict
` Litigation -
` Direct File
`VI. CAUSE OF ACTION ( Enter U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and
`write a brief statement of cause.)
`VII. PREVIOUS BANKRUPTCY MATTERS (For nature of suit 422 and
`423, enter the case number and judge for any associated bankruptcy matter previously adjudicated by
`a judge of this Court. Use a separate attachment if necessary.)
`VIII. REQUESTED IN
`COMPLAINT:
`Check if this is a class action under Rule 23,
`F.R.CV.P.
`Demand $ CHECK Yes only if demanded in complaint:
`Jury Demand: Yes No
`IX. RELATED CASE (S) IF ANY (See instructions): Judge Case Number
`X. Is this a previously dismissed or remanded case? Yes No If yes, Case # Name of Judge
`Date: ___________________________________________ Signature of Attorney of Record _ _____________________________________________
`4 Reinstated
` or Reopened
`290 All Other Real Property
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:13
`SPECIALTY PUBLISHING COMPANY
`04/10/2025 /s/ Matthew Amarin
`DuPage
`Matthew Amarin, 1935 W. Belmont Ave., Chicago, IL 60657
`UDA TECHNOLOGIES, INC
`15 USC 1051 (Lanham Act)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
`Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
`The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces no r supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
`required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Ju dicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
`required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
`Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should co mplete the form as follows:
`I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
`only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defen dant is an official within a government agency, identify first th e agency and
`then the official, giving both name and title.
`(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, ent er the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides a t the
`time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the coun ty in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: I n land
`condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
`(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, no ting
`in this section "(see attachment)".
`II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
`in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, prece dence is given in the order shown below.
`United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
`United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
`Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdicti on arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
`to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defend ant code takes
`precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
`Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
`citizenship of the different parties must be checked . (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
`cases.)
`III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizen ship was indicated above. Mark this
`section for each principal party.
`IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple na ture of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
`that is most applicable. Click here for:
`Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
`V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.
`Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States di strict courts.
`Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be re moved to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
`When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
`Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the distri ct court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
`date.
`Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
`Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Sect ion 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
`multidistrict litigation transfers.
`Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict cas e is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
`Section 1407.
`Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multid istrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
`PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
`changes in statue.
`VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause o f action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
`statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorize d reception of cable service
`VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action unde r Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
`Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being deman ded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
`Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury i s being demanded.
`VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pend ing cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, inse rt the docket
`numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
`Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 04/10/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`Specialty Publishing Company,
`
` Plaintiff,
` v.
`
`UDA Technologies, Inc.,
`
` Defendant.
`
` Civil Action No. 25-CV-3873
`
` District Judge Sharon J. Coleman
`
`
`
`DEFENDANT UDA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
`
`Defendant UDA Technologies, Inc. (“Defendant” or “UDA”), by and through its attorneys,
`The Law Offices of Konrad Sherinian, LLC, hereby respectfully submits its answer in response to
`the Complaint filed by Plaintiff Specialty Pu blishing Company (“Plaint iff” or “Specialty
`Publishing”) on April 10, 2025.
`Introduction
`This action arises from UDA’s willful infringe ment of Plaintiff’s trademark. Specialty
`Publishing Company, a known leader and innova tor in the construction industry owns the
`Constructech trademark and awards deserving companies its “top products” award. UDA won this
`award between 2008- 2012. UDA, however, took its award and modified the trademarked logo to
`use in its marketing and advertising to generate sales. Defendant's misrepresentation extends
`beyond the mere unauthorized use of Plaintif f's trademarked logo. UDA has compounded its
`wrongdoing by fabricating a purport ed endorsement from Constr uctech, further leveraging
`Plaintiff's esteemed reputation for its own commercial gain. UDA was put on notice of its
`violations and unlawful activity but decided to ignore the notice and has continued to use the
`modified logo and fabricated quote on its website. This action seeks to hold UDA responsible for
`its willful violations and properly compensate Plaintiff.
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 17 Filed: 06/30/25 Page 1 of 24 PageID #:47
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`ANSWER:
`UDA admits that that Specialty Publishi ng has filed a complaint alleging willful
`infringement of its trademark.
`UDA admits that Specialty Publishing awards a “top products” award.
`UDA admits that it won one or more awards given by Plaintiff in each of the years 2008-
`2012.
`UDA denies that it modified a trademarked logo to use in its marketing and advertising to
`generate sales.
`UDA denies that it made any misrepresentation.
`UDA denies that it fabricated a purported endorsement from Constructech.
`UDA denies that it was put on notice.
`UDA denies that it decided to ignore a notice.
`UDA denies that it has continue d to use a modified logo or a fabricated quotation on its
`website.
`UDA admits that this action alleges willful violations by UDA.
`UDA denies that it has committed any action comprising a willful tort.
`UDA lacks specific knowledge of the remaining allegations set forth in this paragraph and
`therefore denies the same.
`Jurisdictional Allegations
`1. This is a civil action against the De fendants for trademark infringement,
`counterfeiting, and false designation of origin and unfair competition, under the Lanham Act (15
`U.S.C. § 1051 et. seq.).
`ANSWER:
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 17 Filed: 06/30/25 Page 2 of 24 PageID #:48
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`UDA admits that Plaintiff has filed a civil action against UDA for trademark infringement,
`counterfeiting, and false designation of origin and unfair competition, under the Lanham Act (15
`U.S.C. § 1051 et. seq.). UDA denies that it has committed any tortious act. UDA denies all other
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`2. This Court has subject matter jurisdicti on over the claims in this action that
`relate to trademark infringeme nt, counterfeiting, and false desi gnation of origin and unfair
`competition pursuant to the provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 1121 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`ANSWER:
`UDA admits that this Court has subject matte r jurisdiction. UDA denies that any claims
`against UDA are meritorious.
`3. Defendant used the trademark at issue in interstate commerce.
`ANSWER:
`UDA responds that “the trademark at issu e” is insolubly ambiguous and/or vague.
`Accordingly, UDA lacks specific knowledge of the allegations in this pa ragraph and therefore
`denies the same.
`4. Defendant has engaged in the sale and distribution of soft ware bearing the
`infringing mark within Illinois through its website, “https://store.udatechnologies.com”, and has
`offered and sold said software to consumers residing throughout the United States.
`ANSWER:
`UDA admits that it has engaged in the sale and distribution of software through its website,
`“https://store.udatechnologies.com” and has offered and sold said software to consumers residing
`throughout the United States.
`Case: 1:25-cv-03873 Document #: 17 Filed: 06/30/25 Page 3 of 24 PageID #:49
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`UDA denies the remaining allegations of this paragraph.
`5. Additionally, Defendant adve rtises its software on its website, which is
`accessible to consumers nationwide, and has shi pped software bearing the infringing mark via
`common carriers that traverse state lines. Such activities constitute 'use in commerce' as defined
`by the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1127, and have a direct and substantial effect on interstate
`commerce, as they involve the sale and transportation of goods across state lines and the use of a
`nationally accessible medium for advertising and sales.
`ANSWER:
`Admit that Defendant advertises its software on its website and delivers software via digital
`networks to consumers nationwide. Deny all other allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint.
`6. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the