JS«44C/SDNY

REV. 4/2014 14 Cfn! r iaj

CIVIL COVE

"PtSJJwHwRovef^iBrana'tne information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service qtjLpleadings or other papers as required bylaw, exceptas provided bylocal rulesofcourt. Thisform, approved bytheJudicial Conference of the United States inSeptember1974, is required foruse ofthe Clerk ofCourtforthe purposeofinitiating the civil docket sheet.

2 1 2014

PLAINTIFFSBRIDGEWATER ASSOCIATES, LP

ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, ANDTELEPHONE NUMBERAtif Khawaja , KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP601 Lexington AvenueNew York, New York 10022Telephone: (212)446-4800 Facsimile: (212)446-6460 •CAUSE OFACTION (CITE THE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WHICH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE ABRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUS^

(DO NOTCITEJURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESSDIVERSITY)

False advertising inviolation of section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act. See 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B).

DEFENDANTS

CONVOYFUNDS, LP, CONVOYFUND, LP, CONVOYGLOBAL FUND,LP, CONVOYINVESTMENTS, LLC,

CONVOYMACRO FUND, LP, CONVOYOPTIMAL FUND, LP, CONVOYPREMIUM FUND, LP,

WENQUAN WU, AND HOWARD WANG

ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)

Has this action, case, or proceeding, or one essentially the same been previously filed in SDNY at any time? NcEVesQjudge Previously Assigned

Ifyes, was this case Vol. • Invol. • Dismissed. No [~J Yes • If yes, give date &Case No.

IS THIS AN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CASE? No [*] Yes [~J

(PLACE AN[x] INONEBOXONLY)

CONTRACT PERSONAL INJURY

[ ] 110 INSURANCE [ ] 310 AIRPLANE[ ]120 MARINE [ )315 AIRPLANE PRODUCT[ ]130 MILLER ACT LIABILITY[ J140 NEGOTIABLE [ ] 320 ASSAULT, LIBEL &

INSTRUMENT SLANDER

[ ]150 RECOVERY OF [ ] 330 FEDERALOVERPAYMENT & EMPLOYERS'ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY

OF JUDGMENT [ ] 340 MARINE(J 151 MEDICARE ACT [ ] 345 MARINE PRODUCT( ]152 RECOVERY OF LIABILITY

DEFAULTED [ ] 350 MOTOR VEHICLESTUDENT LOANS [ ] 355 MOTOR VEHICLE(EXCL VETERANS) PRODUCT LIABILITY

[ ]153 RECOVERY OF [ ] 360 OTHER PERSONALOVERPAYMENT INJURY

OF VETERAN'S [ ] 362 PERSONAL INJURY -BENEFITS MED MALPRACTICE

I ]160 STOCKHOLDERSSUITS

I 1190 OTHER

CONTRACT

[ 1195 CONTRACT

PRODUCT ACTIONS UNDER STATUTES

LIABILITY

[ ] 196 FRANCHISE CIVIL RIGHTS

[ ] 440 OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS

REAL PROPERTY(Non-Prisoner)

[ ] 441 VOTINGI 1210 LAND [ ] 442 EMPLOYMENT

CONDEMNATION [ ] 443 HOUSING/[ ]220 FORECLOSURE ACCOMMODATIONS[ ]230 RENT LEASE & [ ] 445 AMERICANS WITH

EJECTMENT DISABILITIES -

[ ]240 TORTS TO LAND EMPLOYMENT

[ ]245 TORT PRODUCT [ ] 446 AMERICANS WITH

LIABILITY DISABILITIES -OTHER

[ ]290 ALL OTHER

REAL PROPERTY

[ ] 448 EDUCATION

Check ifdemandedincomplaint:

CHECK IF THIS IS ACLASS ACTIONUNDERF.R.C.P. 23•

DEMAND $_ OTHER

Check YES onlyifdemanded incomplaintJURY DEMAND: DYES ENO

NATURE OF SUIT

PERSONAL INJURY[ ] 367 HEALTHCARE/PHARMACEUTICAL PERSONALINJURY/PRODUCT LIABILITY

[ ] 365 PERSONAL INJURYPRODUCT LIABILITY , , R„ nTHFR

[ J368ASBESTOS PERSONAL IJesuumtKINJURY PRODUCTLIABILITY

PERSONAL PROPERTY

[ ] 370 OTHER FRAUD[ ] 371 TRUTH IN LENDING

FORFEITURE/PENALTY

] 625 DRUG RELATEDSEIZURE OF PROPERTY

21 USC 881

] 380 OTHER PERSONAL LABORPROPERTY DAMAGE

] 385 PROPERTY DAMAGEPRODUCT LIABILITY

PRISONER PETITIONS

[ ] 463 ALIEN DETAINEE[ ] 510 MOTIONS TO

VACATE SENTENCE28 USC 2255

( ] 530 HABEAS CORPUS[ 1 535 DEATH PENALTY[ ] 540 MANDAMUS & OTHER

PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS

[ ] 550 CIVIL RIGHTS[ ] 555 PRISON CONDITION[ ] 560 CIVIL DETAINEE

CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT

[ ] 710 FAIR LABORSTANDARDS ACT

[ ] 720 LABOR/MGMTRELATIONS

[ ] 740 RAILWAY LABOR ACT

[ ] 751 FAMILY MEDICALLEAVE ACT (FMLA)

[ ) 790 OTHER LABORLITIGATION

[ ] 791 EMPL RET INCSECURITY ACT

IMMIGRATION

] 462 NATURALIZATIONAPPLICATION

] 465 OTHER IMMIGRATIONACTIONS

ACTIONS UNDER STATUTES

BANKRUPTCY

[ ] 422 APPEAL28 USC 158

[ ] 423 WITHDRAWAL28 USC 157

PROPERTY RIGHTS

[ ] 820 COPYRIGHTS[ ] 830 PATENT[ 1840 TRADEMARK

SOCIAL SECURITY

[ ]861 HIA(1395ff)[ ] 862 BLACK LUNG (923)[ ] 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))[ ] 864 SSID TITLE XVI[ ] 865 RSI (405(g))

FEDERAL TAX SUITS

[ ] 870 TAXES (U.S. Plaintiff orDefendant)

[ ] 871 IRS-THIRD PARTY26 USC 7609

OTHER

[X1375[ J400

[ ]410[ J430[ H50f ]460[ H70

STATUTES

FALSE CLAIMS X'.STATE

REAPPORTIONMENT

ANTITRUST

BANKS & BANKING

COMMERCE

DEPORTATIONRACKETEER INFLUENCED & CORRUPT

ORGANIZATION ACT

(RICO)CONSUMER CREDIT

CABLE/SATELLITE TV

]4801490

] 850 SECURITIES/COMMODITIES/

EXCHANGE

] 890 OTHER STATUTORYACTIONS

] 891 AGRICULTURAL ACTS

] 893 ENVIRONMENTALMATTERS

] 895 FREEDOM OFINFORMATION ACT

) 896 ARBITRATION

I 899 ADMINISTRATIVEPROCEDURE ACT/REVIEW OR

APPEAL OF AGENCY DECISION

[ ] 950 CONSTITUTIONALITY OFSTATE STATUTES

DaYpyCLAJM THIS CASE IS RELATED TO ACIVIL CASE NOW PENDING IN S.D.N.Y.?

JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

NOTE: You must also submit at the time of filing the Statement of Relatedness form (Form IH-32).

(PLACEAN x INONEBOXONLY) ORIGIN

|XJ 1 Original Q 2 Removed from •—' 3 Remanded d 4 Reinstated or Q 5 Transferred from • 6 Multidistrict • 7 Appeal to DistrictProceeding State Court from Reopened (Specify District) Litigation Judge from

• a. a„Parti„repreSe„,ed Appenate »££JudgeI I b. At least one

party is pro se.

(PLACE AN x INONEBOXONLY) BASIS OF JURISDICTION IF DIVERSITY, INDICATE• 1 U.S. PLAINTIFF • 2 U.S. DEFENDANT [x] 3 FEDERAL QUESTION \J4 DIVERSITY CITIZENSHIP BELOW.

(U.S. NOT A PARTY)

CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (FOR DIVERSITY CASES ONLY)

(Place an [X] in one box for Plaintiff and one box for Defendant)

PTF DEF PTFDEF PTF DEFCITIZEN OFTHIS STATE [ ] 1 [ ] 1 CITIZEN ORSUBJECT OFA [ ] 3 [ ] 3 INCORPORATED and PRINCIPAL PLACE [ ] 5 [ ] 5

FOREIGN COUNTRY OF BUSINESS IN ANOTHER STATE

CITIZEN OFANOTHER STATE []2 []2 INCORPORATED or PRINCIPAL PLACE []4[]4 FOREIGN NATION []6 []6OF BUSINESS IN THIS STATE

PLAINTIFF(S) ADDRESS(ES) AND COUNTY(IES)

DEFENDANT(S) ADDRESS(ES) AND COUNTY(IES)

DEFENDANT(S) ADDRESS UNKNOWNREPRESENTATION IS HEREBY MADE THAT, AT THIS TIME, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE, WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE, TO ASCERTAIN

RE9IBENCE ADDRESSES OF THE FOLLOWING DEFENDANTS:

Checkone: THIS ACTION SHOULD BE ASSIGNED TO: • WHITE PLAINS [x] MANHATTAN(DO NOT check either box if this a PRISONER PETITION/PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTSCOMPLAINT.)

DATE 10/21/2014 SIGNATUBEOF ATTORNEY OF RECORD ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN THIS DISTRICTA "ff/^ « [ ] NO

f]h+rW/) ' [X YES (DATE ADMITTED Mo.OJ Yr. 2005RECEIPT* II Attorney Bar Code #AK5894

Magistrate Judge is to be designated by the Clerk of the Court.

Magistrate Judge fHFll* ** w iTsoTJesignated.

Ruby J. Krajick, Clerk of Court by Deputy Clerk, DATED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT (NEW YORK SOUTHERN)

lilW ^ is so Desigi

ORIGINAL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKJVJDG6

BB00EB\Cfc

BRIDGEWATER ASSOCIATES, LP )

Plaintiff, )

CONVOY FUND, LP, )CONVOY FUNDS, LP, )CONVOY GLOBAL FUND, LP, )CONVOY INVESTMENTS, LLC, )CONVOY MACRO FUND, LP, )CONVOY OPTIMAL FUND, LP, )CONVOY PREMIUM FUND, LP, )WENQUAN WU, AND )HOWARD WANG. )

Defendants. )

14 CV 8418Civil Action No.

COMPLAINT<•' •

Plaintiff Bridgewater Associates, LP ("Bridgewater"), by and through its attorneys,0

Kirkland & Ellis LLP, for its Complaint against Convoy Fund, LP, Convoy Funds, LP, Convoy ---i

'3

,— O

Global Fund, LP, Convoy Investments, LLC, Convoy Macro Fund, LP, Convoy Optimal Fund, -^

LP, and Convoy Premium Fund, LP (together, "Convoy"), and Wenquan WuandHoward Wang

(collectively with Convoy, the "Defendants"), hereby alleges as follows:

NATURE OF THE CASE

1. This action arises out of a series of false and misleading advertising claims

published by Convoy and its founders, Wenquan "Robert" Wu and Howard Wang, about their

affiliation with Bridgewater. As one of the largest and most successful hedge fund firms in the

world, Bridgewater is widely recognized by insiders as both a market- and thought-leader in the

field of investment management. Fully aware of Bridgewater's venerable reputation, Mr. Wu

and Mr. Wang tried to publicize their own newly-formed competing hedge fund, Convoy, by

lying to the market about their former roles at Bridgewater. Despite having served in only low-

ranking roles at Bridgewater with limited responsibility, Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang have tried to

pass themselves off in several public forums as former key figures responsible for core aspects of

Bridgewater's business.

2. They were nothing of the sort. In reality, Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang were junior-

level Bridgewater employees who left Bridgewater in 2010 and 2012, respectively. Despite

agreeing to inform Bridgewater of their post-employment plans before pursuing any such plans,

Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang kept their competitive ambitions hidden—telling Bridgewater that they

were "traveling," "ballroom dancing," and only passively advising "friends and family" on how

to invest their money. Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang sustained their charade until their non-compete

periods with Bridgewater ended, at which point they began marketing Convoy as a "global

macro investment hedge fund" that caters to the very clients that Bridgewater has successfully

serviced for years.

3. Rather than promote their new venture honestly, Defendants elected to trade off

of Bridgewater's hard-earned reputation. To that end, Defendants advertised Convoy by

exaggerating and misrepresenting their short, limited stints at Bridgewater to suggest an

affiliation between the two firms. Indeed, although Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang were only junior

members of Bridgewater's information technology and Client Services departments respectively,

Defendants published extravagant claims on Convoy's website and elsewhere about Mr. Wu and

Mr. Wang's prior roles and responsibilities at Bridgewater, including that:

• Mr. Wang—one of several hundred junior analysts to have worked in Bridgewater'sClient Services department during the time he was there—personally "managed"multi-billion dollar "portfolios" for Bridgewater and was "part of a 3-memberinvestment team responsible for overseeing and marketing" Bridgewater's $70 billion

All Weather fund; and

• Mr. Wu, a software engineer who primarily worked on coding for Bridgewater'sclient fee calculators, was on "the team that built and oversaw" the various "criticalcomponents" of Bridgewater's extensive company-wide "operations systems."

4. Bridgewater has confronted Defendants about these statements and other

troubling behavior. Instead of cooperating with Bridgewater, Defendants' conduct has only

raised further concern. For example, Defendants selectively took down some, but not all, of their

misleading statements and have mysteriously hidden the bulk of Convoys' website behind a

password. Defendants have refused to confirm that they will make no similar false advertising

claims in the future. In fact, even after Bridgewater alerted Defendants of their harmful and

inaccurate statements, Defendants published and submitted the very same exaggerated claims to

no less than the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in support of a trademark application for

Convoy. And despite multiple requests by Bridgewater, Defendants have refused to identify the

materials that they continue to possess from their brief employment at Bridgewater.

5. Bridgewater has thus been forced to bring this action to compel cessation of

Defendants' publicly-available false advertising claims, to enjoin Defendants from making any

similar false advertising claims in the future, and to recover for damages suffered as a result of

Defendants' actions.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

6. This action arises under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq. Jurisdiction

is proper in this Court pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1121, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(b), 1367(a).

7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants, because Defendants are all

residents of the state of New York and regularly transact business in the state of New York.

8. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c).

THE PARTIES

9. Bridgewater Associates, LP is among the world's most preeminent investment

management firms. Headquartered in Westport, Connecticut, Bridgewater offers hedge fund

products to institutional clients and utilizes a global macroinvestment approach.

10. Convoy Funds, LP is a Delaware limited partnership. Upon information and

belief, Convoy Funds, LP is an entity through which Convoy offers a hedge fund product to

institutional clients and also purports to utilize a global macro investment approach. Convoy

Funds, LP's principal place ofbusiness is 307 E. 44th St., Apt. 819, New York, New York 10017.

11. Convoy Fund, LP is a Delaware limited partnership. Upon information and

belief, Convoy Fund, LP is an affiliate of Convoy Funds, LP or an entity through through which

Convoy offers a hedge fund product and its principal place of business is 307 E. 44th St., Apt.

819, New York, New York 10017.

12. Convoy Global Fund, LP is a Delaware limited partnership. Upon information

and belief, Convoy Global Fund, LP is an affiliate of Convoy Funds, LP or an entity through

through which Convoy offers a hedge fund product and its principal place of business is 307 E.

44th St., Apt. 819, New York, New York 10017.

13. Convoy Macro Fund, LP is a Delaware limited partnership. Upon information

and belief, Convoy Macro Fund, LP is an affiliate of Convoy Funds, LP or an entity through

through which Convoy offers a hedge fund product and its principal place of business is 307 E.

44th St., Apt. 819, New York, New York 10017.

14. Convoy Optimal Fund, LP is a Delaware limited partnership. Upon information

and belief, Convoy Optimal Fund, LP is an affiliate of Convoy Funds, LP or an entity through

through which Convoy offers a hedge fund product and its principal place of business is 307 E.

44th St, Apt. 819, New York, New York 10017.

15. Convoy Premium Fund, LP is a Delaware limited partnership. Upon information

and belief, Convoy Premium Fund, LP is an affiliate of Convoy Funds, LP or an entity through

through which Convoy offers a hedge fund product and its principal place of business is 307 E.

44th St., Apt. 819, New York, New York 10017.

16. Convoy Investments, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company through which

Convoy is now marketing and offering its Convoy hedge fund. Upon information and belief,

Convoy Investments, LLC's principal place of business is 501 5th Avenue, Suite 427, New York,

New York 10017.

17. Wenquan "Robert" Wu is a founder and principal of Convoy. Upon information

and belief, Mr. Wu resides at 307 E. 44th St, Apt. 819, New York, New York 10017.

18. Howard Wang is a founder and principal of Convoy. Upon information and

belief, Mr. Wang also resides at 307 E. 44th St., Apt 819, New York, New York 10017.

BACKGROUND OF THE DISPUTE

A. Bridgewater and Its $70 Billion "All Weather" Hedge Fund.

19. Hedge funds are private investment vehicles typically comprised of a portfolio of

investments that are actively managed using proprietary investment strategies.

20. Founded in 1975 by Ray Dalio, Bridgewater is a global investment firm that is

widely heralded today as one of the largest and most successful hedge fund firms in the world.

Industry insiders and investors alike recognize that Bridgewater's position as a market leader is

built upon a unique understanding of global financial markets, which is driven by Bridgewater's

unmatched investment in economic research. Indeed, Bridgewater has devoted significant

resources over the last four decades mastering economic markets and the forces that drive them.

Bridgewater's clients recognize that Bridgewater's understanding of marketplace forces has

enabled it to identify and master a set of fundamental "timeless and universal" economic truths

that hold true "across time" and "across countries." With that highly valuable and proprietary

knowledge, Bridgewater is able to craft investment portfolios that differ substantially from

traditional approaches.

21. As a result of this ongoing, resource-intensive investment in research,

Bridgewater has been able to achieve remarkable results for its clients. Within the past year

alone, Bridgewater was voted as the #1 firm in the industry by investors in independent client

satisfaction surveys by Cogenthedge and IPE magazine. Before that, Pensions & Investments, an

international newspaper focused exclusively on money management, rated Bridgewater as one of

the top four managers in the industry in multi-asset class solutions for institutional investors.

Bridgewater has also ranked at the top of Institutional Investor's "world's top 100 hedge funds"

list and received such distinctions as the "Macro-Focused Hedge Fund Finn of the Year,"

aiCIO's "Hedge Fund Industry Innovation Award," and Absolute Return's "Management Firm of

the Year."

22. Bridgewater offers its institutional investors several exclusive hedge fund

products that are consistently ranked among the best in the world. One such product is

Bridgewater's "All Weather" fund. Launched in 1996, the All Weather fund is comprised of

holdings spanning multiple asset classes and dozens of individual markets across the world. The

All Weather fund relies on an investment strategy known as "risk parity," which prioritizes the

ability to generate stable returns regardless of shifts in surrounding economic conditions. The

All Weather fund's "risk parity" investment strategy was created by Bridgewater's founder, Ray

Dalio, along with a handful of Bridgewater senior investment officers.

23. Today, Bridgewater commands over $150 billion in assets under management.

Over $70 billion of those assets are currently invested in the All Weather fund.

B. In 2007 and 2008, Robert Wu and Howard Wang Join Bridgewater asJunior-Level Employees.

24. Convoy's co-founders and principals, Robert Wu and Howard Wang, are former

junior-level Bridgewater employees who worked in Bridgewater's information technology and

Client Services departments, respectively.

25. Mr. Wu joined Bridgewater in February 2007 as a software developer in

Bridgewater's internal finance department. In that role, Mr. Wu's primary responsibilities

involved coding isolated portions of software applications used to calculate certain Bridgewater

fees. In April 2008, Mr. Wu was transferred to the Core Technology department, which is

responsible for maintaining the different information technology systems and applications used

at Bridgewater. Mr. Wu's role in Core Technology again related to discrete coding projects.

26. In September 2008, Mr. Wang joined Bridgewater as an entry-level, junior analyst

in Bridgewater's "Client Services" department. Unlike Bridgewater's Research, Account

Management, and Trading departments, which devise and implement Bridgewater's trading and

risk management strategies, Bridgewater's Client Services department is responsible for

managing Bridgewater's relationships with clients. As a junior employee in the Client Services

group, Mr. Wang spent his time supporting others on marketing projects and responding to

routine client requests.

C. In 2010 and 2012, Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang Leave Bridgewater.

27. Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang did not work at Bridgewater long. After being transferred

between internal departments in April 2008, Mr. Wu left Bridgewater after three years of

employment in April 2010. Similarly, after three-and-a-half years in the Client Services

department, Mr. Wang left Bridgewater in January 2012. Neither Mr. Wu nor Mr. Wang ever

received promotions above their initial, entry-level positions at Bridgewater.

28. Neither Mr. Wu nor Mr. Wang had any responsibility for, or experience with,

managing, overseeing, or operating Bridgewater's funds, portfolios, or investment strategies.

Whereas Mr. Wu was granted limited access to confidential information relating to the specific

fee-calculation software and other applications with which he worked during his time at

Bridgewater, his responsibilities as a software developer never entailed the actual management

or operation of any Bridgewater fund. And although Mr. Wang was likewise exposed to certain

proprietary Bridgewater information as a junior analyst in Client Services, he was never asked or

permitted to in any way manage or oversee any Bridgewater fund. Nor did he ever make any

investment decisions for Bridgewater.

D. After Leaving Bridgewater, Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang Hide Their Plans toLaunch a Competing Global Macro Hedge Fund from Bridgewater.

29. Given that its deep understanding of timeless economic principles is central to its

success and highly valuable to the marketplace, Bridgewater requires its employees, including

junior staff like Mr. Wang and Mr. Wu, to safeguard confidential Bridgewater information.

30. Under their respective employment agreements with Bridgewater, Mr. Wu and

Mr. Wang expressly agreed that they would not "use, divulge, disclose, or otherwise make

accessible to any other person" any Bridgewater confidential information without Bridgewater's

prior written consent. They further agreed to not "directly or indirectly engage in any

business . . . that is in competition with any business of Bridgewater" for a two-year period after

leaving Bridgewater. In order to "expeditiously, economically and in good faith resolv[e] any

potential dispute as to whether a new employer, position, profession, endeavor or business" is in

competition with Bridgewater, both Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang agreed to inform Bridgewater of any

potential new employment opportunities before accepting or engaging in them.

31. Upon leaving Bridgewater, Mr. Wu consistently reported to Bridgewater in emails

over a two-year period that he was simply unemployed and "traveling." At no point during that

correspondence did Mr. Wu indicate that he planned to create a competing hedge fund.

32. Nor did Mr. Wang. Upon his departure from Bridgewater, Mr. Wang stated in a

November 2012 email to Bridgewater that he intended to pursue ballroom dancing "full time as a

competitor"—an activity that he "intend[ed] to do for the foreseeable future." While Mr. Wang

separately requested approval from Bridgewater to start a small business to "look[] after the

savings" of certain friends and family to help subsidize his ballroom dancing, he represented to

Bridgewater that this would only be a side business, that he would not "actively manag[e]

money," and that the passive investment strategy he planned to use would not in any way "mimic

All Weather" or All Weather's "growth/inflation framework."

33. In light of these representations, Bridgewater approved Mr. Wang's narrow

request to modify his non-compete in January 2013. In return, Mr. Wang expressly agreed to

"not provide any asset management services or investment advice, either directly or indirectly, to

anyone other than family members or personal friends" and further pledged to "not use, develop,

or market any investment or trading strategy (or any substantially similar investment strategy or

strategies) that was used, developed, or investigated by Bridgewater during his employment,

including, but not limited to, the global macro fundamental approach or the All Weather

approach."1

34. Unbeknownst to Bridgewater, however, Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang had already taken

steps to launch their own competing hedge fund by mid-2012. In fact, despite claiming to have

been unemployed throughout the two-year period since leaving Bridgewater, Mr. Wu paid for

1 While this limitation would expire at the conclusion of his non-compete in January 2014, Mr. Wang expresslyacknowledged that his obligation to not use or disclose confidential Bridgewater information is perpetual andongoing. Bridgewater's investigation into any improper use, disclosure, or theft of Bridgewater's confidentialinformation by Defendants continues.

and registered Convoy's current web address, www.convoyinvestments.com, on July 5, 2012.

And the following day, Mr. Wu incorporated Convoy Investments, LLC, the Delaware limited

liability company through which Convoy is now marketing its fund.

35. On March 17, 2014, merely weeks after his non-compete expired, Mr. Wang

announced to Bridgewater for the first time that he was expanding his modest side business.

Instead of "looking after the savings" of friends and family, Mr. Wang revealed that he was

launching a hedge fund that would "market[] to institutional investors," the type of investors that

make up Bridgewater's client base. Mr. Wang further stated that he would also be modifying his

investment strategy. Despite previously assuring Bridgewater that his strategy would not

resemble the "All Weather growth/inflation framework," Mr. Wang indicated that his strategy

would now place a heavy emphasis on growth and inflation.

36. These actions surprised Bridgewater given Mr. Wang's prior representations. In a

phone conversation with Mr. Wang on or around March 18, 2014, Bridgewater requested that

Mr. Wang discuss his future plans with Bridgewater to ensure that he would not violate his

ongoing obligations to safeguard Bridgewater's confidential information. Despite agreeing to do

so at that time, Mr. Wang never did.

E. Unable to Gain Legitimate Traction with the Investing Public, DefendantsResort to Publishing False Statements about Convoy's Principals.

37. After announcing that it would expand to institutional investors in March 2014,

Convoy was unable to generate the type of business and attention that it sought.2 Defendants

then decided to take a different tack. Rather than acquire legitimacy in the investment

management and hedge fund worlds on their own, they attempted to poach it from their former

2 Despite proclaiming to seek $200 million in investments, Convoy has not yet filed a Form ADV with theSecurities and Exchange Commission—a filing that is required for companies managing more than $25 millionin assets.

10

employer. Thus, in a transparent bid to trump up the investment credentials of Convoy's two

founders and draw attention to Convoy as a hedge fund, Defendants published the following

statements on Convoy's website, www,convoyinvestments.com:

llnujril v\nn«_ * o-roumltr

II i'a.ij.I i« >. i>-li-iui<lei oi < on,-is In-.e-tmcr.t-, ami s- lespoiisihU'

Jul U'-Ctull .Hit! JHMtlnIlO U.iUJ.Siit'tlKIil PiSOl Jo !i>UIitil!I!£ ( O!l\0\

in ?n|> ll>"' in! spout in- uicL'i ni.iiMatii!; jioitlolm- tut

i!i-ii'r.in'K.il sir.c-toi- im>-.i lCvfiuK 'ii Butkcw.iic: Asstx. sales

whci-' lie nitl Rnt-tfii lit-t met Hi'W.iul h,is pan tit >i '-uu'iiiK'i

m.t'-tsuiM.t ic.ua ic-[)oij-iI>le t^i mtKeina .mil nuiikeliiiii the

S"li l-llioii Ml We.iiitei Stia!t-_'\ on lieli.ii! of some »>( the l.Hfc-t

imi iti<>-: -v>|"ln-tit..ited tii.e-tois m !Sk" ".\>ulit imJiuiimi

-i>' -Mfii'i. *>.c tliii him!- pen-ton- cnifoAiiiciiis ,uhI iutimi.ilitnis

Il>i". .•:.! Is.i- -•> i.i'l.uu'il '.Uuie ,i.i|)ci- ami comment,utc- on ,i

b.o.i.i j.iiitjc o! Hi'(.-liiicul (\'|>iv- -tuii ,i- Sail n-k itill.ttioii ami

lr cj m!k";;1!'US

Howard [Wang] is a co-founder of Convoy Investments and is responsible forresearch and portfolio management. Prior to founding Convoy in 2013, Howardspent his career managing portfolios for institutional investors, most recently atBridgewater Associates where he and Robert [Wu] first met. Howard was part ofa 3-member investment team responsible for overseeing and marketing the $70billion All Weather Strategy on behalf of some of the largest and mostsophisticated investors in the world, including sovereign wealth funds, pensions,endowments and foundations.

* * *

These statements were published as early as May 17, 2014, and may have been published before that date.

11

Koheri Wu. < ¥ \. < o-Foun<itr

\- the ^o-h'iuitk'i of < ointn iu\ estinoiiis Roheii i- u-po isil-L-

loi st!,:!C2tc liK-ines- pJminmsi ;tu<l ii.hIiiiu ups.i.rn<ii- Ptuu to

i«i:iidiiic ( mi\K>\. Robeit -pent In- c.uee* v..ikim_ m scJmolom

.*n«l opu<if»oii- :»o-l icieitth ,it Biiitaouatci \ —u'la'c- "Ahciv.

lie -,>,i» pair of tlw loam thai b-iil' .iti.l o-.ei-a". .-ijitol

^i>ii,}>oiic!ii- of opciatiott- -Weill- Pi mi 1,1 |«»inni« Rj bIli-'-. ,:U-:

Rt'i'fi! *j>. pail of .1 ic-t.Mi<J> leant tlii.it <lv< eloped the -f.itvii

ens in.' fc-h;>oiouv at Douhlccliil. which iatei -pun oft to K-loiik-

Mtujraiki

As the co-founder of Convoy Investments, Robert [Wu] is responsible forstrategic business planning and trading operations. Prior to founding Convoy,Robert spent his career working in technology and operations, most recently atBridgewater Associates, where he was part of the team that built and oversawcritical components ofoperations systems.

(See Ex. A (emphasis added).)

38. In a further effort to generate interest in their fund and to trade off of

Bridgewater's market-leading industry reputation, Defendants made similar proclamations in the

media. For example, upon information and belief, Defendants instructed a contact at Bloomberg

to publish a marketing piece about Convoy entitled "Ex-Bridgewater Analyst Wang Starts No-

Fee Hedge Fund" on August 5, 2014. (Ex. B.) In that article, Mr. Wang, speaking on behalf of

Convoy, claimed that the performance of "most hedge fund[s]" merely "mirrors the broader

market" and, thus, "fail[s] to justify the high fees collected." (Id.) In an attempt to legitimize

those views, Defendants again misrepresented Mr. Wang's roles and responsibilities at

Bridgewater:

Convoy Investments co-Founder Howard Wang worked for $160 billionBridgewater Associates LP from 2008 to 2012 and was an analyst on theinvestment team for the Westport, Connecticut-based firm's $80 billion AllWeather strategy.

(Id. (emphasis added).)

39. In addition to the claims above, as of August 7, 2014, Mr. Wang's public

12

Linkedln page similarly claimed that Mr. Wang "was part of a small investment team that helped

to market and oversee the $70 billion All Weather Strategy on behalf of some of the largest and

most sophisticated investors in the world . . . ." (Ex. C (emphasis added).)

40. There can be no question that these statements are both literally false and

materially misleading. To begin, Mr. Wang did not "manage" or "oversee" Bridgewater's All

Weather fund. Nor was he ever on a "3-member investment team responsible for overseeing"

All Weather or "the investment team" for All Weather. While Mr. Wang worked in a limited

capacity on projects relating to the marketing of All Weather—a common task for a junior

associate in the Client Services department—he never "managed" or had any investment

authority over any money or assets while at Bridgewater.

41. Nor could Mr. Wang have "managed" any of the Bridgewater funds (or

"portfolios," as he calls them) as a junior analyst. To put Convoy's statements in perspective,

Bridgewater presently employs roughly 1,400 people—more than 200 of which are "analysts"

working in several different departments. In the Client Services department alone, there are

currently dozens of such analysts working on "All Weathef'-related projects who have the same

level of responsibility as Mr. Wang had, or more. None of those analysts have any managerial

responsibility or authority over the All Weather fund whatsoever.

42. Similarly, the suggestion that Robert Wu was part of "the team" at Bridgewater

"that built and oversaw critical components [of Bridgewater's] operations systems," including its

"trading operations," is likewise false and materially misleading. Mr. Wu did not "oversee" any

aspects of Bridgewater's multi-billion dollar "operations systems." Instead, he was a junior-level

software developer and technician, who worked on only one sliver of Bridgewater software

related to the calculation of client fees. Nothing in his Bridgewater work history can be

13

characterized as "overseeing" the "critical components" of Bridgewater's overall operations.

And to the extent that Convoy's statements regarding Mr. Wu suggest that he had anything to do

with "trading operations" at Bridgewater, they are false. Indeed, Bridgewater has an entire

department devoted to "trading operations" in which Mr. Wu was never employed.

43. Defendants' false claims have already caused palpable marketplace confusion.

Numerous news outlets have parroted Defendants' claims, mischaracterizing Mr. Wu and Mr.

Wang's former roles, responsibilities, and ranks at Bridgewater. In fact, the unifying theme in

such articles is their claim that Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang are former Bridgewater "traders," "alum,"

or "veterans" of significant stature. (See Ex. D.) For example, one financial news outlet has

even referred to Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang as Ray Dalio's "apostles"—despite the fact that neither

Mr. Wu nor Mr. Wang ever directly worked with, or reported to, Mr. Dalio. (Id.) Embedded

within each of these statements is the false and damaging suggestion that Mr. Wu and Mr. Wang

are former high-profile Bridgewater employees, who were each responsible, in a primary role,

for the development, management, or implementation of Bridgewater's world-renowned

investment strategies. Upon information and belief, this is precisely the type of marketplace

confusion that Defendants intended to create by making such claims.

44. Collectively, the false statements and claims attributable to Defendants described

in this section "E" shall be referred to as the "False Advertising Claims."

F. After Being Confronted, Defendants Lock Convoy's Website and Refuse toAffirm That They Will Not Make Any Additional False Advertising Claims.

45. After discovering the August 5, 2014 Bloomberg article and the corresponding

False Advertising Claims on Convoy's website, Bridgewater reached out to Defendants on or

around August 7, 2014. During a telephone conversation between Bridgewater and Mr. Wang,

Mr. Wang did not deny that the above False Advertising Claims regarding Mr. Wang and Mr.

14

Wu were indeed false and misleading. In fact, Mr. Wang pledged to take down the False

Advertising Claims "off the [Convoy] website" in order to "minimize the damage here."

Thereafter, Defendants purportedly attempted to remove some of the False Advertising Claims.

46. Despite the above attempts, Defendants have failed to remove, let alone remedy

all of the False Advertising Claims that have been published. For example, Convoy's website

continues to proclaim that Mr. Wang "spent his career managing portfolios for institutional

investors, most recently at Bridgewater Associates . . . ." Moreover, Defendants have not

retracted or removed any of their statements in the August 5, 2014 Bloomberg article, which

continues to remain online.

47. Tellingly, after the August 7, 2014 telephone conversation and Bridgewater's

follow up letters, Defendants took steps to conceal the vast majority of Convoy's website—

including the "Investments," "Operations," and "Insights" tabs—locking away sections of the

site behind a password-protected "Client Login."

48. For example, Convoy's website used to include a section entitled "Our

Advantage" on which Defendants purported to describe Convoy's approach to investments. As

15

further evidence of Defendants' attempt to trade off of Bridgewater's name and reputation, this

section of Convoy's website was plastered with language that mimics the way Bridgewater

describes its own investment approach, including:

To create a portfolio that truly protects an investor's financial future requires adeep, timeless, and universal understanding ofhow markets work and how assetprices move. . . . [A]t their most fundamental level, the economy and the marketscan be understood through basic yet timeless and universal logic. ... A portfoliodesigned to perform consistently over long periods of time must be based on anageless logic ....

(See Ex. A.) Like the "Investments," "Operations," and "Insights" pages, Defendants appear to

have now hidden the "Our Advantage" section as well.

49. On top of hiding the contents of its website behind a login, Defendants have been

uncooperative and have refused to respond in a timely or meaningful manner to Bridgewater's

multiple attempts to reach out to address the False Advertising Claims and other concerns.

50. Defendants appear intent on continuing to make similar false statements. After

the August 7 phone call, Bridgewater sent letters on August 12 and August 28, 2014, to

Convoy's principals, requesting, among other things, that Defendants confirm that they will not

publish similar false statements in the future. Despite two letters and multiple phone calls and

email communications, Defendants have refused to make this simple confirmation.

51. Convoy has even continued to circulate the same False Advertising Claims made

on its website. For example, on August 29, 2014, Mr. Wu filed a federal trademark application

bearing serial number 86380574 with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in the hope of

obtaining a proposed mark on behalf of Convoy. (Ex. E.) As part of that submission, Mr. Wu

filed "a [sic] advertisement brochure for the company's service" entitled "Fund Overview" as a

trademark specimen. (Id.) Even though Mr. Wang had already assured Bridgewater that

Defendants would take down the False Advertising Claims published on its website just three

16

weeks earlier, the "Fund Overview" specimen attached to Convoy's trademark application

recites the most damaging statements among the False Advertising Claims, including that Mr.

Wang "spent his career managing portfolios for institutional investors, most recently at

Bridgewater Associates where he was part of a 3-member team responsible for overseeing and

marketing the $70 billion All Weather Strategy," and that Mr. Wu "was part of the team at

Bridgewater that built and oversaw critical components of operations systems." Nowhere in that

submission to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office did Mr. Wu, or any representative from

Convoy, disclose that these statements are in any way incorrect.

52. To the contrary, Mr. Wu expressly declared that all of the information contained

in the trademark application that he submitted on behalf of Convoy was truthful and accurate. In

fact, as a signatory to the application, Mr. Wu affirmed the veracity of his submission, expressly

acknowledging that any "willful false statements" in the application "may jeopardize the validity

of the application" and "are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C.

Section 1001."

53. To enjoin and remedy the ongoing harm that it continues to incur from these

improper actions, Bridgewater now seeks relief from this Court.

CAUSE OF ACTION

COUNT I

(False Advertising in Violation of the Lanham Act)

54. Bridgewater incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1

through 53 of this Complaint.

55. Defendants knowingly and intentionally published the False Advertising Claims

in commercial speech.

56. Convoy's founders and sole principals, Robert Wu and Howard Wang directed,

17

controlled, ratified, participated in, and were the moving forces behind Convoy's publication of

the False Advertising Claims.

57. The False Advertising Claims are literally false, and expressly and/or impliedly

misrepresent the nature, characteristics, and qualities of Convoy's products and services in a

material way in violation of section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act. See 15 U.S.C.

§ 1125(a)(1)(B).

58. The False Advertising Claims mislead and deceive consumers in interstate

commerce and may lead them to choose Convoy's products and services over Bridgewater's

products and services. Defendants' past and continued publication of the False Advertising

Claims is willful, deliberate, and in bad faith.

59. Bridgewater has been and is likely to continue to be damaged by Defendants'

False Advertising Claims in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact. In addition, by

marketing Convoy as a global macro hedge fund catering to institutional investors, Defendants

have sought to position Convoy as a direct competitor of Bridgewater. As such, Defendants'

False Advertising Claims are injurious to Bridgewater.

60. Defendants' False Advertising Claims will irreparably and unfairly harm

Bridgewater, including harm to Bridgewater's reputation and goodwill for which Bridgewater

has no adequate remedy at law.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Bridgewater prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor on its claim

for relief set forth above and award it relief including, but not limited to, the following:

(i) An injunction requiring Defendants to remove any remaining False AdvertisingClaims in the public domain;

(ii) An injunction permanently enjoining Defendants, and all persons in active concert

or participation with any of them from, representing by any means whatsoever,directly or indirectly, that

a. the False Advertising Claims, or similar variations of such claims, are true;and

b. any Defendants, any products or services offered by Defendants, or anyactivities undertaken by Defendants, are associated or connected in any waywith Bridgewater;

(iii) An Order holding Defendants liable, jointly and severally, for, and requiringDefendants to pay, Bridgewater compensatory damages in an amount as yetundetermined caused by the foregoing acts of false advertising and trebling suchcompensatory damages for payment to Bridgewater in accordance with 15 U.S.C.§1117;

(iv) An Order requiring Defendants to pay Bridgewater' costs and attorney's fees inthis action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117; and

(v) Other relief the Court may deem appropriate.

Dated: October 21,2014 RespectjfftlyNew York, New York

Atif KhawajaKIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP

601 Lexington AvenueNew York, New York 10022Telephone: (212) 446-4800Facsimile: (212)446-6460

Gregg F. LoCascio, P.C.KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP

655 Fifteenth Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20005-5793Telephone: (202) 879-5000Facsimile: (202) 879-5200

Attorneysfor Bridgewater Associates, LP

19