Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. https://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA Tracking number: ESTTA1527771
`Filing date: 03/30/2026 07:43:51 PM
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`Proceeding no. 92089228
`Party Defendant
`Saab AB
`Correspondence
`address
`ERIC W. LEE
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`1050 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, NW, SUITE 1100
`WASHINGTON, DC 20036
`UNITED STATES
`Primary email: elee@bakerlaw.com
`Secondary email(s): bhipdocket@bakerlaw.com, cldocketing@bakerlaw.com, je-
`montgomery@bakerlaw.com, rschrote@bakerlaw.com
`(202) 861-1500
`Submission Other
`Consented: No
`Other filing reasoning: Notice of Supplemental Exhibit to Motion to Suspend
`Pending Outcome of Civil Action
`Certificate of ser-
`vice
`Method of service: Email
`I hereby certify that a true and complete copy of Other has been served on
`03/30/2026 by delivering a copy to David Principe by email at dprin-
`cipe@phillipslytle.com; mvoytovich@philllipslytle.com; ipdocket-
`ing@phillipslytle.com.
`Filer's name Eric W. Lee
`Filer's email elee@bakerlaw.com
`Signature /Eric W. Lee/
`Date 03/30/2026
`Attachments Notice of Supplemental Exhibit A to Motion to Suspend.pdf (Undesignated | 122
`KB | 3 pages)
`Description: SAABâ##S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBIT TO MOTION
`TO SUSPEND PENDING OUTCOME OF CIVIL ACTION
`EXHIBIT A_.pdf (Exhibit | 2 MB | 87 pages)
`Description: Exhibit A
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`Skapa Tech, Inc.,
`
`Petitioner,
`v.
`
`Saab AB,
`
`Registrant.
`
`
`
`
`Cancellation No. 92089228
`
`Registration No. 7582416
`
`Mark: SKAPA®
`
`SAAB’S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBIT TO
`MOTION TO SUSPEND PENDING OUTCOME OF CIVIL ACTION
`
`Registrant Saab AB (“Saab”) submits this notice of filing the attached supplemental
`Exhibit A to its Motion to Suspend Pending Outcome of Civil Action filed on March 27, 2026
`(“Motion”). 11 TTABVUE. The original Exhibit A to the Motion is a true and complete copy of
`Saab’s Complaint filed on March 27, 2026, in the civil action between the parties styled Saab AB
`v. Skapa Tech, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California (“Civil
`Action”). The supplemental Exhibit A is an Electronic Case File (“ECF”) file-stamped version of
`Saab’s Complaint. The file-stamped version was unavailable prior to today, March 30, 2026, when
`the Southern District of California assigned a case number to the Civil Action and file-stamped
`Saab’s Complaint with it. Saab therefore files its supplemental Exhibit A to ensure a complete
`record for the Motion, in which Saab respectfully re quests that the Board issue an Order
`suspending this proceeding for cancellation of the SKAPA® registration pending the outcome of
`the Civil Action.
`
`Dated: March 30, 2026 /s/ Eric W. Lee
`Eric W. Lee
`elee@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1100
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 861
`-1500
`Rebecca Schrote
`rschrote@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`200 Civic Center Drive, Suite 1200
`Columbus, OH 43215
`(614) 228-1541
`
`Attorneys for Registrant Saab AB
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that a true and complete copy of the foregoing Saab’s Notice of
`Supplemental Exhibit to Motion to Suspend Pending Outcome of Civil Action has been served on
`Skapa Tech, Inc. by forwarding said copy on March 30, 2026, via email to:
`David Principe
`PHILLIPS LYTLE LLP
`125 Main Street, Suite 800
`Buffalo, NY 14203
`dprincipe@phillipslytle.com
`mvoytovich@philllipslytle.com
`ipdocketing@phillipslytle.com
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner Skapa Tech, Inc.
`
`
` /s/ Eric W. Lee
`Eric W. Lee
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit A
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`Shaia A. Stambuk (SBN 329240)
`sstambuk@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 900
`Costa Mesa, CA 92626
`(714) 754-6600
`
`Katherine R. McMorrow (SBN 315723)
`kmcmorrow@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2700
`Los Angeles, CA 90067
`(310) 820-8800
`
`William C. Bergmann (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`wbergmann@bakerlaw.com
`Eric W. Lee (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`elee@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1100
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 861-1500
`
`Rebecca Schrote (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`rschrote@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`200 Civic Center Drive, Suite 1200
`Columbus, OH 43215
`(614) 228-1541
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`SAAB AB and SAAB, INC.
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAAB AB and SAAB, INC.,
`Plaintiffs,
`v.
`SKAPA TECH, INC.,
`Defendant.
` Case No.:
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
`JUDGMENT
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`'26 CV1979 SBCBJC
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.1 Page 1 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
` Plaintiffs Saab AB and Saab, Inc. (collectively, “Saab”) allege as follows:
`INTRODUCTION
`1. This is a declaratory judgment action to resolve a real and concrete trademark
`dispute created by Defendant Skapa Tech, Inc.’s efforts to block Saab’s lawful use of the
`term “skapa” and to cancel Saab’s federally registered SKAPA® trademar k. Saab seeks
`clarity and finality regarding its right to continue operating its “Skapa by Saab” innovation
`incubator and to maintain its valid U.S. trademark registration.
`2. Saab’s “Skapa by Saab” incubator uses the term “skapa” in its ordinary
`descriptive sense as the Swedish word for “create” and always in conjunction with Saab’s
`well‑known SAAB house mark. Saab and Skapa Tech also provide different services to
`different industries and target highly sophisticated consumers. Saab’s use of the term
`“skapa” does not create a likelihood of confusion and has not resulte d in any actual
`confusion with Skapa’s asserted use of the term “skapa.”
`3. In addition, on information and belief, Skapa Tech did not use the term
`“skapa” in U.S. commerce for services similar to those offered by Saab be fore Saab filed
`its trademark application and obtained its registration for th e SKAPA® mark. For this
`additional independent reason, on information and belief, Skapa Tech lacks senior
`common‑law rights in services that could support either an infringement claim or
`cancellation of Saab’s registration.
`4. This action is necessary to resolve the parties’ dispute in a single forum, to
`confirm that Saab’s use of the term “skapa” in “Skapa by Saab” is not infringing, and to
`confirm that Saab’s SKAPA® registration is valid and enforceable and should not be
`cancelled.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`5. This action arises under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq., including
`without limitation 15 U.S.C. §§ 1119 and 1125(a), and the Declaratory Judgment Act , 28
`U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.
`//
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.2 Page 2 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`6. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338,
`and 15 U.S.C. § 1121, because this action presents an actual contro versy under federal
`trademark law concerning alleged infringement of unregistered trademar k rights and the
`validity of a U.S. trademark registration.
`7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Skapa Tech, Inc. (“Skapa
`Tech”) because Skapa Tech has purposefully directed trademark e nforcement activities
`toward this District that it knew or reasonably should have known w ere likely to cause
`harm in this District. Skapa Tech’s trademark enforcement efforts are directed at Saab’s
`California-based operations in this District and have created ongoi ng uncertainty and
`disruption to Saab’s business activities here. Saab’s claims arise direct ly out of Skapa
`Tech’s activities directed toward this District, and the exercise of personal jurisdiction over
`Skapa Tech in this District is consistent with traditional notions of fair play and substantial
`justice.
`8. Venue in this District is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because a substantial
`part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims in thi s action occurred in this
`District. Saab’s use of the term “skapa,” including as “Skapa by Saab,” emanates from this
`District, where Saab’s Skapa by Saab team is based and where the releva nt business,
`branding, and marketing decisions are implemented. Skapa Tech’s trademark enforcement
`activities are directed at and have their primary effects in this District.
`PARTIES
`9. Plaintiff Saab AB is a Swedish limited liability company with its principal
`place of business in Linköping, Sweden. Saab AB is the owner of U.S. Trademark Reg.
`No. 7,582,416 for the mark SKAPA® that Defendant Skapa Tech, Inc. seeks to cancel. A
`true and correct Trademark Status & Document Retrieval (TSDR) pr intout for the
`SKAPA® registration is attached as Exhibit 1.
`10. Plaintiff Saab, Inc. is a New York corporation with a place of business in San
`Diego, California, and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Saab AB. The Skapa by Saab
`incubator operates within Saab, Inc. and is based in San Diego, California.
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.3 Page 3 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`11. On information and belief, Defendant Skapa Tech, Inc. is a Virgini a
`corporation with its principal place of business in Charlottesville, Virginia.
`FACTS
`Saab’s Use of “Skapa by Saab”
`12. Saab is a global aerospace and defense company that develops, manufactures,
`and supplies advanced systems, products, and services across the doma ins of aeronautics,
`land, naval, and security. Founded in 1937, Saab serves governments, public aut horities,
`and commercial customers in the United States and worldwide wit h complex,
`technology‑intensive solutions, including aircraft and aircraft systems, s ensors and radar,
`command‑and‑control systems, naval platforms, training and simulation systems, and civil
`security technologies. Saab operates internationally, with activities i n more than 30
`countries, and provides its products and services to customers i n over 100 countries,
`primarily to sophisticated institutional and governmental cli ents that require highly
`specialized and regulated solutions.
`13. Saab AB owns numerous live U.S. trademark registrations for and
`incorporating its SAAB mark, including but not limited to U.S. Trademark Reg. Nos.: (1)
`1,025,449, (2) 1,035,072, (3) 2,673,877, (4) 3,260,071, (5) 3,271,585, (6) 3,689,488, (7)
`4,195,329, and (8) 4,405,567, covering a wide range of goods and services. True an d
`correct TSDR printouts for these registrations are attached as Exhibit 2.
`14. Saab has used the SAAB mark extensively and continuously in the United
`States and worldwide for many decades in connection with its aerospace, defense, security,
`and related goods and services. Through long-standing use, substantial sales, and extensive
`advertising, marketing, and promotion, the SAAB mark has achieved a hi gh degree of
`recognition and distinctiveness in the United States and is widely known among consumers
`and purchasers of Saab’s goods and services.
`15. As a result of Saab’s extensive use, advertising, marketing, and promotion of
`its goods and services under its SAAB marks throughout the world and in the United States
`//
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.4 Page 4 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`since at least as early as 1957, the SAAB marks have become well-known and highly
`distinctive, and consumers associate the SAAB marks exclusively with Saab.
`16. Skapa by Saab is an innovation and technology incubator operating within
`Saab, Inc. and based in San Diego, California. Launched in April 2024, Skapa by Saab
`partners directly with highly sophisticated end-users in the defense, aviation, and security
`industries to identify operational challenges and to develop, test , and deploy
`technology-driven solutions in real-world environments. Skapa by Saab’s work includes
`rapid prototyping, testing, and refinement of technologies, often usi ng existing Saab
`platforms as test beds to validate and scale solutions at the speed of operational need. A
`true and correct printout of Skapa by Saab’s website as of March 27, 2026, is attached as
`Exhibit 3.
`17. The term “skapa” is a Swedish word meaning “create.” Consistent with that
`meaning, “Skapa by Saab” means “Create by Saab,” which refers to the purpose and
`function of the Skapa by Saab incubator as a creation-focused innovat ion model within
`Saab, Inc. “Skapa by Saab” uses the term “skapa” in that term’s ordinary descriptive sense
`to explain the nature of Saab’s innovation activities and as a nod to Saab’s Swedish roots.
`18. The term “skapa” is not a coined term and is used by multiple third parties in
`the technology, software, and consulting spaces, including in business and product names,
`to convey the concept of creating or developing solutions. As a result, consumers encounter
`the term “skapa” in a variety of contexts and are accustomed to di stinguishing among
`different uses of the term based on the surrounding wording and context.
`Saab’s U.S. Trademark Registration for “SKAPA”
`19. On November 29, 2023, Saab AB filed U.S. Trademark App. No. 98/289,789
`for the wordmark “SKAPA” based on a bona fide intent to use in connect ion with
`“[s]cientific and technological research and development in the fie lds of AI (artificial
`intelligence), autonomy, additive manufacturing, machine learning, de fence and
`communications” in International Class 42.
`//
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.5 Page 5 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`20. On May 21, 2024, Saab’s U.S. Trademark App. No. 98/289,789 was
`published in the Trademark Official Gazette, having receiv ed no refusal on the basis of
`likelihood of confusion or on any other basis.
`21. No person or entity filed any opposition or extension of time to oppose Saab’s
`U.S. Trademark App. No. 98/289,789, and the application was allowed on July 16, 2024.
`22. On August 20, 2024, Saab submitted a Statement of Use claiming use in
`commerce at least as early as April 23, 2024. The Statement of Use was accepted on
`November 1, 2024. On November 26, 2024, the U.S. Patent and Trademark O ffice
`(“USPTO”) issued a registration certificate on the Principal Register for Saab’s SKAPA®
`mark as U.S. Trademark Reg. No. 7,582,416. See Exhibit 1.
`Skapa Tech’s Purported Trademark Rights
`23. On information and belief, Skapa Tech was founded in 2016 and is in the
`business of providing software development services in the Unite d States. Skapa Tech’s
`website states: “We build web, mobile, and cloud software produ cts that inspire joy in
`users.” A true and correct printout of Skapa Tech’s website as of Marc h 27, 2026, is
`attached as Exhibit 4.
`24. On information and belief, Skapa Tech advertises, markets, promotes, and
`provides its services throughout the United States, including to one or more clients
`operating in California.
`25. On information and belief, at the time Saab AB filed a U.S. t rademark
`application for the mark “SKAPA,” Skapa Tech had not filed any U. S. trademark
`application for any mark consisting of or containing the term “SKAPA.”
`26. On January 19, 2024, 51 days after Saab filed its U.S. trademark application
`for the mark SKAPA®, Skapa Tech filed U.S. Trademark App. No. 98/365,953 for the
`wordmark “SKAPA” for various services in International Class 42, and it asserted two
`different dates of first use in commerce for different groups of services. Specifically, Skapa
`Tech’s application claimed use in commerce since September 2, 2016, for the following
`services:
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.6 Page 6 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`Advisory services relating to computer software; Customizing
`computer software; Maintenance of computer software; Product
`design and development in the field of edtech and e-learning,
`healthtech and healthcare, distribution, engineering and
`architecture, non-profit organizations, and government contracts;
`Software authoring; Software design and development; Software
`engineering services; Testing of computer software; Updating of
`computer software.
`Skapa Tech’s application also claimed use in commerce of July 6, 2022, for the following
`services (“AI Services”):
`Consultancy in the field of artificial intelligence technology;
`Developing customized software in the field of artificial
`intelligence, machine learning, and large language models for
`others; Development of new technology for others in the field
`of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and large langu age
`models; Technical consulting in the field of artificial intelligence
`(AI) software customization.
`27. On February 6, 2025, in response to the USPTO’s request to provide an
`English translation for the term “SKAPA,” Skapa Tech submitted to th e USPTO the
`following statement: “The English translation of SKAPA in the mark is CREATE.”
`28. On February 13, 2025, the USPTO refused to register Skapa Tech’s applied-
`for SKAPA mark on the ground that it was likely to cause confusion with Saab’s registered
`SKAPA® mark.
`29. On August 8, 2025, just a few days before Skapa Tech filed a petition to cancel
`Saab’s SKAPA® registration, Skapa Tech submitted to the USPTO a “Volun tary
`Amendment” containing the following “Miscellaneous Statement” pur porting to correct
`Skapa Tech’s claimed first use in commerce dates, stating:
`The dates of use pertain to the following services: advisory
`services relating to computer software; customizing computer
`software; maintenance of computer software; product design and
`development in the field of edtech and e-learning, healthtech and
`healthcare, distribution, engineering and architecture, non-profit
`organizations, and government contracts; software authoring;
`software design and development; software engineering
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.7 Page 7 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`services; testing of computer software; and, updating of
`computer software. The remaining services in the application
`have different dates of first use. The mark was in use with all of
`the services prior to the filing date of the application.
`30. The “remaining services in the application” with “different dates of first use”
`referenced in Skapa Tech’s Voluntary Amendment are the AI Services. Skap a Tech’s
`August 8, 2025 Voluntary Amendment does not identify the dates of first use in commerce
`for the AI Services and instead asserts merely that all app lied-for services were used at
`some time prior to Skapa Tech’s January 19, 2024 application filing date.
`31. As a result, Skapa Tech lacks any properly verified claimed first use date for
`the purported SKAPA mark in connection with the AI Services prior to Saa b’s priority
`date.
`32. On information and belief, Skapa Tech’s purported SKAPA mark was not
`used in commerce in connection with at least the AI Services prior to November 29, 2023,
`the priority date of Saab’s SKAPA® registration.
`33. Accordingly, on information and belief, Skapa Tech cannot establish priority
`over Saab with respect to any asserted trademark rights in the purport ed SKAPA mark in
`connection with at least the AI Services.
`Skapa Tech’s TTAB Petition and Infringement Threats
`34. On August 13, 2025, Skapa Tech filed a Petition for Cancellat ion with the
`U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) seeking cancella tion of Saab’s U.S.
`Trademark Reg. No. 7,582,416 for the SKAPA® mark on the basis of alleged priority and
`likelihood of confusion with Skapa Tech’s purported unregistered common-law use of the
`SKAPA mark (“TTAB Petition”).
`35. On August 18, 2025, the USPTO suspended proceedings on Skapa Tech’s
`U.S. Trademark App. No. 98/365,953 for the SKAPA mark pending the outcome of Skapa
`Tech’s TTAB cancellation proceeding.
`36. In its TTAB Petition, Skapa Tech affirmatively alleged that Saab’s SKAPA®
`registration “should be cancelled because it consists of or comprise s a mark which so
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.8 Page 8 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`resembles Petitioner’s previously used SKAPA Mark as to be likely, w hen used in
`connection with [Saab’s] services, to cause confusion, mistake, or dece ption within the
`meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d), and to cause damage to [Skapa Tech] thereby.” These
`allegations assert the core elements of a federal trademark infringe ment claim, including
`alleged priority, likelihood of confusion, and damage.
`37. In addition to the TTAB Petition, through correspondence and discussions
`between counsel, Skapa Tech has repeatedly asserted that i ts objections are not limited to
`Saab’s federal trademark registration for the SKAPA® mark, and that they extend to Saab’s
`ongoing use of the phrase “Skapa by Saab,” as reflected in Exhibit 3. Skapa Tech has taken
`the position that such use infringes Skapa Tech’s purported trademark rights.
`38. As a result of Skapa Tech’s affirmative allegations of elements of an
`infringement claim in the TTAB Petition and its repeated assertions that Saab’s ongoing
`use of the phrase “Skapa by Saab” is objectionable and infringing, Saab has a real and
`reasonable apprehension that Skapa Tech will pursue an infringement action against Saab
`based on Saab’s current and continued use of the term “skapa.”
`COUNT I
`Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of Trademark
`39. Saab incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
`40. This claim arises under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq., including
`without limitation 15 U.S.C. §§ 1119 and 1125(a), and the Declaratory Judgment Act , 28
`U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.
`41. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Saab and Skapa Tech
`concerning whether Saab’s use of the term “skapa,” including in t he phrase “Skapa by
`Saab,” infringes any purported trademark rights claimed by Skapa Tech.
`42. Saab’s use of “Skapa by Saab” does not infringe any valid or enforceable
`trademark rights Skapa Tech may claim in the term “skapa.”
`//
`//
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.9 Page 9 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`43. Saab’s “Skapa by Saab” incubator uses the term “skapa” in its ordinary
`descriptive sense—as the Swedish word for “create”—to explain the na ture of Saab’s
`innovation activities, and not as a trademark or source identifier.
`44. Saab’s use of “skapa” in “Skapa by Saab” is readily distinguishable i n
`appearance, sound, and overall commercial impression from Skapa Tech’s asserted use of
`“skapa,” including because it prominently includes Saab’s well-known and highly
`distinctive SAAB house mark.
`45. Saab’s use of “skapa” in “Skapa by Saab” occurs in a context that is materially
`different from Skapa Tech’s asserted use of “skapa,” including with respect to the nature
`of the services offered, the channels of use, and the intended audiences.
`46. The relevant consumers for the parties’ respective services are highly
`sophisticated and exercise a high degree of care in making purchasing and e ngagement
`decisions, which further negates any likelihood of confusion.
`47. On information and belief, Skapa Tech did not use the term “skapa” in U.S.
`interstate commerce in connection with consultancy or developme nt services relating to
`artificial intelligence, machine learning, or large language mode ls prior to November 29,
`2023, the filing date and constructive priority date of Saab’s U.S. Tr ademark Reg. No.
`7,582,416 for the SKAPA® mark.
`48. As a result, on information and belief, Skapa Tech lacks senior common-law
`rights that could support a claim that Saab’s use of “skapa” in “Sk apa by Saab” infringes
`Skapa Tech’s purported trademark rights in connection with such services.
`49. On information and belief, Saab’s use of “skapa” in “Skapa by Saab” has not
`resulted in any known consumer confusion, and is not likely to result i n confusion as to
`source, affiliation, sponsorship, or approval.
`50. Saab is entitled to a declaratory judgment that it is not infr inging, has not
`infringed, and is not liable for infringement of any purported trade mark rights claimed by
`Skapa Tech in the term “skapa.”
`//
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.10 Page 10 of
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`COUNT II
`Declaratory Judgment of Validity and Enforceability of
`U.S. Trademark Reg. No. 7,582,416, and Denying Cancellation
`51. Saab incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
`52. This claim arises under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq., including
`without limitation 15 U.S.C. §§ 1119 and 1125(a), and the Declaratory Judgment Act , 28
`U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.
`53. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Saab and Skapa Tech
`concerning whether Skapa Tech is entitled to seek cancellation of Saab’s U.S. Trademark
`Reg. No. 7,582,416 for the SKAPA® mark on the basis of alleged prior ity and likelihood
`of confusion with Skapa Tech’s purported use of “SKAPA mark.
`54. Saab maintains and is entitled under the Lanham Act to maintain its
`registration for the SKAPA® mark.
`55. No likelihood of confusion exists between Saab’s SKAPA® mark and Skapa
`Tech’s purported SKAPA mark, including in light of the parties’ d ifferent services,
`channels of use, and intended audiences.
`56. The relevant consumers for the parties’ respective services are highly
`sophisticated and exercise a high degree of care in making purchasing and e ngagement
`decisions, which further negates any likelihood of confusion.
`57. On information and belief, Skapa Tech did not use the term “skapa” in U.S.
`interstate commerce in connection with consultancy or developme nt services relating to
`artificial intelligence, machine learning, or large language mode ls prior to November 29,
`2023, the filing date and constructive priority date of Saab’s U.S. Tr ademark Reg. No.
`7,582,416 for the SKAPA® mark.
`58. As a result, on information and belief, Skapa Tech lacks senior common-law
`rights in services that could support cancellation of Saab’s U.S. Tradem ark Reg. No.
`7,582,416.
`//
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.11 Page 11 of
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`59. On information and belief, Saab’s use of the term “skapa,” including in
`connection with its SKAPA® mark, has not resulted in any known consumer confusion,
`and is not likely to result in confusion as to source, affiliation, sponsorship, or approval.
`60. Saab is entitled to a declaratory judgment that its U.S. Trademark R eg. No.
`7,582,416 for the SKAPA® mark is valid, enforceable, and should not be ca ncelled, and
`that Skapa Tech’s TTAB Petition to cancel that registration should be denied.
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`Saab respectfully prays for relief from this Court as follows:
`a. A declaration that Saab’s use of the term “skapa,” including its use of the
`phrase “Skapa by Saab,” does not infringe, and has not infringed, any
`trademark rights claimed by Skapa Tech.
`b. A declaration that Saab’s U.S. Trademark Reg. No. 7,582,416 for the
`SKAPA® mark is valid, enforceable, and should not be cancelled, and that
`Skapa Tech’s TTAB Petition to cancel that registration should be denied.
`c. An award of costs and attorneys’ fees incurred by Saab.
`d. An award of all further relief that this Court deems just and proper.
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
` Saab demands a jury trial on all issues triable by a jury.
`Dated: March 27, 2026 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`
` By:
`Shaia A. Stambuk (SBN 329240)
`sstambuk@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 900
`Costa Mesa, CA 92626
`(714) 754-6600
`
`Katherine R. McMorrow (SBN 315723)
`kmcmorrow@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2700
`Los Angeles, CA 90067
`(310) 820-8800
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.12 Page 12 of
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`William C. Bergmann (pro hac vice
`forthcoming)
`wbergmann@bakerlaw.com
`Eric W. Lee (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`elee@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1100
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 861-1500
`
`Rebecca Schrote (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`rschrote@bakerlaw.com
`BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
`200 Civic Center Drive, Suite 1200
`Columbus, OH 43215
`(614) 228-1541
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`SAAB AB and SAAB, INC.
`Case 3:26-cv-01979-BJC-SBC Document 1 Filed 03/27/26 PageID.13 Page 13 of
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JS 44 (Rev. 03/24) CIVIL COVER SHEET
`The JS 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 September 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 (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
`and One Box for Defendant)
`(For Diversity Cases Only)
`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 4 4
`of Business In This State
`2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5
`Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
`Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6
`Foreign Country
`IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
`CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
`110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act
`120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
`130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
`140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 400 State Reapportionment
`150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust
`& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking
`151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce
`152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent - Abbreviated 460 Deportation
`Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Racketeer Influenced and
`(Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
`153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR 880 Defend Trade Secrets 480 Consumer Credit
`of Veteran’s Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud 710 Fair Labor Standards Act of 2016 (15 USC 1681 or 1692)
`160 Stockholders’ Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending Act 485 Telephone Consumer
`190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal 720 Labor/Management SOCIAL SECURITY Protection Act
`195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations 861 HIA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV
`196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/