, attorney for the food truck Mangia Mobile
. The pleading represents his official response
to the trademark infringement lawsuit
brought by brick-and-mortar restaurant Mangia Italiano (3145 South Grand Blvd; 314-664-8585).
1) The very first sentence of the 22-page filing, which reads, "Alex, Thomas and Catherine Daake are the siblings three." A footnote adds: "Not to be confused with Copyrighted children's book The Siblings Four
, authored by counsel for Defendant and available for purchase through Defendant's counsel's office." Sigh.
2) Italian proverbs sprinkled throughout. For example, Watkins believes
that if the restaurant really cared about the harm it now claims to be
suffering, it would've filed its suit much earlier. Thus, "Chi tace acconsente.
(Translation: 'Silence gives consent.')"
the way, Gut Check is no attorney but finds this argument a bit
disingenuous. The months preceding the lawsuit were spent trying to
reach an out-of-court settlement, not giving consent.
3) Quotes from Casablanca
. There are two.
4) The following attempt to show a contradiction in Mangia Italiano's position:
goes to great lengths....to create distance between its products, which
it confusingly classifies as "high quality" and Defendant's products
which it classifies as "not Italian" and "fast food." Plaintiff cannot
have its cannoli and eat it too. Either the products are similar or they
5) A little ribbing of his own clients, before setting the record straight on who they are:
is correct that Catherine Daake is "highly sophisticated," though her
siblings are believed to be possessed of some rather unsophisticated
stories relating to Catherine's awkward teenage years. Sophistication
issue aside, the sibling owners of Mangia Mobile had never heard of
Plaintiff's restaurant prior to receiving the cease and desist letter
issued by Plaintiff's prior counsel of record. Moreover, and relevance
issue aside, neither Catherine nor her brothers live in a "gated
Here's the pleading in its entirety: Mangia Mobile Response Memo
Law students seeking models of sober legal rhetoric might skip over the memorandum recently filed by