RALEIGH, N.C.–Truliant Federal Credit Union has served BB&T Corp. and SunTrust Banks Inc. with a series of documents to compel the banks to respond to a trademark-infringement lawsuit filed by Truliant.
As CUToday.info reported here, in June, Truliant filed a lawsuit against BB&T and SunTrust Banks after they announced plans to merge and form a new $28-billion bank to be called Truist. The credit union’s complaint alleges the new name is too similar sounding to its own.
Neither bank has filed a legal response to the Truliant lawsuit, according to the Winston-Salem Journal. Truliant attorney Richard Coughlin said in the legal filings that the banks were served copies of the summons, complaint, corporate disclosures and notice of right to consent, the publication reported. Truliant has asked a federal judge to request that the banks respond by Sept. 25.
In a statement, Truliant President Todd Hall said the “service of the complaint is the next step in the litigation process. We continue to work toward a successful resolution of this matter. Our commitment to defend our brand and preserve the equity we’ve built in the Truliant name over two decades is just as strong now as it was when the Truist name was announced.”
A spokesperson for BB&T declined comment.
Looking to ‘Drag it Out’
Bowman Gray IV, a local independent stockbroker, told the Winston-Salem Journal he suspects “that BB&T and SunTrust are trying to drag it out and force another communication, seeing if Truliant will back down.”
As CUToday.info reported, the combined bank would have $63.3 billion in assets and would be headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., where Truliant FCU has made a major investment in building 10 new branches to serve the market.
As part of its suit, Truliant FCU is requesting compensatory and punitive damages.
“Defendants have taken advantage of and sought to trade upon the reputation and goodwill developed by Truliant and ‘Tru” trademarks ... and to capitalize on the market created by Truliant for its Truliant services. Defendants’ acts were committed with the reckless disregard of Truliant’s rights,” the Winston-Salem Journal quoted the lawsuit as stating.
What Truliant is Seeking
Truliant wants the banks to be prevented from moving forward with marketing Truist at retail or online, including applying for Truist trademarks. BB&T applied June 11 for five sets of trademarks with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, according to the Journal.
“Truliant claims the banks are attempting to piggyback on Truliant’s brand efforts since it debuted in June 1999, particularly in the Triad and Charlotte where there is significant retail and operational overlap,” the Winston-Salem Journal said. “The credit union said allowing Truist in the retail marketplace has the potential to cause ‘irreparable injury to Truliant and to its business, reputation and goodwill.’”
In his statement, Truliant’s Hall added, “This is a clear infringement on our name, and their proximity to our main business region will confuse consumers and undermine the trust we have built in our institution.”
Duty to ‘Police its Mark’
The Journal quoted Justin Nifong, a patent attorney with NK Patent Law at its Winston-Salem office, as saying, “Truliant has a duty to police its mark. Otherwise, it loses its exclusivity in the marketplace.”
Nifong told the publication Truliant’s challenge will be in proving there is, or will be, confusion among consumers between its products and services and those offered by Truist. He added Truliant’s legal position may come down to the strength of its brand in the marketplace compared with the strength that BB&T and SunTrust would bring to Truist.