Sham Suits Attacked

LAS VEGAS (CN) - In a federal antitrust complaint, a contact lens company that says it spent $1.4 million on legal fees to defend itself from a claim for $20.51 in damages claims 1-800 Contacts cranks out "sham lawsuits" like a "well-oiled machine," knowing that most competitors can only afford to settle.

In its own case, Lens.com says, "1-800 spent around $1,100,000 in attorneys' fees to chase $20.51 in damages," and a federal judge rejected the claim anyway - but not until Lens.com had spent $1.4 million defending itself.

Lens.com claims 1-800 Contacts' business tactic is based on the belief "that its competitors ... could not afford to fight 1-800, which meant that 1-800 need not concern itself with actual trademark rights; 1-800 could instead enforce the trademark rights it dreamed of."

The complaint continues: "1-800 sued all competitors who had the temerity to refuse its demands. Between 2005 and 2010 alone, 1-800 filed over 15 repetitive, predominantly sham lawsuits against its competitors. In these lawsuits, 1-800 asserted objectively baseless claims against its competitors without regard to merits and without a genuine interest in redressing grievances, but rather to harass, neutralize and vanquish its competition. From extensive practice, 1-800's litigation apparatus has become a well-oiled machine. Indeed, 1-800 now has a form complaint for its frequent lawsuits against competitors, which is always at the ready and requires little more than a new caption from lawsuit to lawsuit.

"When Lens refused to accede to 1-800's demands, 1-800 unleashed the litigation equivalent of a thermonuclear war in response to the damage equivalent of a hangnail. The district court determined that 1-800's infringement claim, if successful, might have fetched twenty dollars and fifty-one cents ($20.51) in lost profits. Nonetheless, 1-800 poured enormous financial and other resources into the lawsuit, and pursued scorched-earth tactics usually reserved for bet-the-company litigation. In the end, upon information and belief, 1-800 spent around $1,100,000 in attorneys' fees to chase $20.51 in damages.

"In late 2010, the district court tossed 1-800's lawsuit against Lens in a comprehensive 65-page decision. By then, however, 1-800 had achieved its objective. Lens had incurred in excess of $1,400,000 in litigation fees and expenses to defend against 1-800's frivolous infringement claims.

"Undeterred, 1-800 now hopes to revive its lawsuit and extend the pain based upon 'new evidence.' Once again, however, 1-800 has no basis for its argument. The federal court dismissed 1-800's lawsuit on December 14, 2010, while its so-called 'new evidence' is from November 30, 2009.

"1-800's anticompetitive behavior has violated state and federal antitrust laws, the

Lanham Act and Nevada common law. Lens files this lawsuit to stop 1-800's misconduct and anticompetitive practices; to recover compensatory and treble damages; and to obtain injunctive and other equitable relief. Lens further seeks declaratory relief in connection with 1-800's asserted trademark rights."

Lens.com seeks punitive damages for abuse of process, attempted monopoly, unfair competition and unfair trade. It is represented by Michael McCue with Lewis and Roca.

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit