Bethune-Cookman sues an individual party promoter over homecoming event ads using its Wildcat and BC marks

What was filed

Bethune-Cookman University, Inc. filed a verified complaint on October 23, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division. The case is Bethune-Cookman University, Inc. v. Roger Farrell, Jr. d/b/a LiveParty Entertainment, No. 6:26-cv-02495, assigned to Judge Paul G. Byron, with Magistrate Judge Robert M. Norway. The defendant is Roger Farrell, Jr., an event promoter in Miramar, Florida, sued individually and as doing business as LiveParty Entertainment. The complaint pleads four counts: trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1125; false designation of origin and unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125; trademark infringement and unfair competition under Florida common law; and violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Fla. Stat. § 501.201 et seq. It is signed by Gregory W. Herbert of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. in Orlando, Florida, and also lists Stephen G. Anderson. The university demands a jury.

The marks

The university, a Florida not for profit corporation in Volusia County, asserts registrations for the word marks BETHUNE-COOKMAN (Reg. Nos. 2,997,255 and 3,010,916) and MARCHING WILDCATS (Reg. No. 7,619,087), a Wildcat Logo (Reg. No. 4,406,777), and an Interlocking BC Logo (Reg. Nos. 6,826,252, 6,960,410, 6,983,239, 6,983,240, 6,983,241 and 6,983,242). It also claims common law rights in B-CU. The complaint says the BETHUNE-COOKMAN mark and the Wildcat Logo are incontestable under 15 U.S.C. § 1065. USPTO records list Bethune-Cookman University, Inc. as owner of all ten registrations and show each as live and registered, with registration dates from September 20, 2005 to December 24, 2024. They also show Section 15 declarations acknowledged for both BETHUNE-COOKMAN registrations in 2011 and for the Wildcat Logo registration in 2020.

What the complaint alleges

The complaint alleges that Farrell promotes parties under his name, the alias Duke LiveParty and the name LiveParty Entertainment, timed around university football games and homecoming, and advertises and sells tickets online and in print using the university's marks without authorization. It says counsel sent a demand letter dated August 10, 2026, personally served on August 22; that Farrell answered in writing on August 25; that a second letter followed on September 3; and that Farrell replied that day that he had deactivated an Instagram account and removed references to the university, which the complaint calls false.

According to the complaint, the university then found an advertisement for The Official Homecoming Encore showing the Wildcat Logo and distorted versions of it, and that the webpage advertising the event lists the university's own Daytona Beach address as the event location. It says Farrell wrote to counsel on October 2, 2026 that posts using the university's likeness had been removed or edited, and that around October 19 to 20, 2026 he posted new advertisements on Facebook. The university alleges confusion as to source, sponsorship and affiliation, and that the conduct is knowing and willful.

Relief requested

The university asks for preliminary and permanent injunctions against use of its marks or similar marks and against unfair competition; an accounting of profits and damages; actual damages, profits and treble damages for willful infringement or, at its election, statutory damages of up to $2,000,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services under 15 U.S.C. § 1117; interest; and attorneys' fees for an exceptional case under 15 U.S.C. § 1117.

A complaint is not a ruling

None of this is a finding. A newly filed complaint tells you what Bethune-Cookman alleges about party advertisements and demand letters. It does not tell you that Farrell infringed or competed unfairly. On October 26, 2026, the docket shows an initial case order signed by Judge Byron and a summons issued to Farrell. The court has not decided the case.