ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT Plaintiff MidCap Business Credit, LLC (“Plaintiff”) brings this suit against MidCap Financial Trust, MidCap Financial Services, LLC, MidCap Financial Services Capital Management, LLC, MidCap FinCo Designated Activity Company, and Apollo Capital Management, L.P. (collectively “Defendants”), alleging violations of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §101 et seq. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff owns a registered and incontestable mark in “MIDCAP BUSINESS CREDIT,” Reg. No. 4,797,903 (registered August 2015), and has applied for, but not yet received, a registration for “MIDCAP” as a standalone mark. Plaintiff asserts two types of federal claims — one under 15 U.S.C. §1114, alleging infringement of Plaintiff’s registered mark “MIDCAP FINANCIAL TRUST;” and the second, under 15 U.S.C. §1125(a), alleging unfair competition and false designation of origin based on Plaintiff’s rights in the unregistered mark “MIDCAP.” Plaintiff asserts similar claims under New York State law, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law §349, and under the common law. Defendants move to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). They argue that although Plaintiff purports to be enforcing its rights in “MIDCAP BUSINESS CREDIT,” Plaintiff actually seeks to enforce rights in the standalone mark “MIDCAP,” which it cannot do because “MIDCAP” is generic, or at best, descriptive of Plaintiff’s services. In essence, Defendants argue that Plaintiff cannot bootstrap a claim based upon its rights in “MIDCAP BUSINESS CREDIT” into a claim based upon the lesser included “MIDCAP.” I agree with Defendants. The Complaint conflates “MIDCAP BUSINESS CREDIT” with “MIDCAP,” and as to Plaintiff’s rights in “MIDCAP,” the Complaint is vague and conclusory. For this reason, and others provided below, the motion to dismiss is granted. BACKGROUND The Complaint alleges the facts as follow, which I accept as true for the purposes of deciding this motion. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Plaintiff is a commercial finance company that works with and extends customized asset-based loans to small and mid-size manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, service companies, and other commercial and industrial businesses throughout the United States. Compl. 1-2.1 It provides working capital loans to companies generally unable to obtain traditional bank financing sufficient to support their growth or unique needs. 2. Plaintiff began offering services under its current name, MidCap Business Credit, LLC, in 2004, officially changing its name from Hartford Business Credit, LLC, better to reflect its national customer base and expansion plans. 3. Since that time, Plaintiff has used the trade names, marks, domain names, and social media handles “MIDCAP,” “MIDCAP CREDIT,” and “MIDCAP BUSINESS CREDIT,” and variants thereof to identify its financial services, defined as “the ‘MIDCAP MARKS.’” 3. At that time, Plaintiff operated the domain name midcapcredit.com and prominently displayed the following mark and logo:
3. In 2013, Plaintiff described its primary site as midcap.com; it retained the midcapcredit.com domain name, and automatically redirected visitors to its site, midcap.com.
