*******Sorry for the length of this post!*******
A non-profit entity that has been using the name "Company X" since 2003 has announced that it was "closing its doors" and would be filing articles of Dissolution in Massachusetts.
The fact is that the "Company X" name was never legally registered in Massachusetts (the state of incorporation of prior named entity), did not file for a fictitious name or change of name, and never filed a federal service mark or trademark. Basically, they simply just began using the name, Company X.
A group of investors, wanting to continue the mission of the so-called Company X, has began preparations to continue the mission by using the same Company X name. The "new Company X" is incorporated under the Company X name in Delaware and has pending service & trademarks for "Company X" and its logo.
The "old Company X" has sent a cease & desist letter to the "new Company X" alleging infringement of proprietary rights and claiming injury to the "old Company X's" goodwill and reputation.
In as much as damages are required for successful civil litigation, how can an entity who has "closed its doors" and stopped all business possibly have any damages?
Which entity, old or new, has superior rights to the name "Company X"? "Old" used it first without any name changes, logo trademarks, or registrations and the "new" has corporate name status in Delaware and pending trade/service marks.