IP Law Daily, TRADEMARK—N.D. Ill.: Mixed results in psychotherapy trademark infringement case against competitors and former collaborators, (Apr 13, 2026)

By Carolin Dennis, B.Sc., LL.B., LL.M.

Claims for trademark infringement, unfair competition, false advertising, violations of the Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices Act (UDTPA), and breach of fiduciary duty were adequately pleaded.

A federal district court in Illinois partially granted and partially dismissed the motion to dismiss claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition, false advertising, violations of UDTPA, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract by the Center for Self Leadership, Inc. (CSL), a company that provides training and certification to psychotherapists. The court dismissed the breach of contract claim because the contract unambiguously showed that there was no duty to refrain from developing a new Internal Family Systems (IFS) programming. The court also granted the motion to dismiss all claims against Anderson, Inc. without prejudice finding that CSL had not sufficiently alleged what Anderson, Inc. did that was legally wrongful. However, the court allowed the remaining claims to proceed (The Center for Self Leadership, Inc. v. PESI, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-11339 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 9, 2026)).

Background. The CFS Institute provides training and certification to psychotherapists under the INTERNAL FAMILY SYSTEMS or IFS brand of psychotherapy, which its founder Richard Schwartz, PhD, developed over 30 years ago. In 2008, Massachusetts psychiatrist Frank Anderson M.D. (Anderson) enrolled in one of CSL’s IFS Training programs. Thereafter, he became one of CSL’s lead trainers and took over Schwartz’s role as lead trainer. Meanwhile, CSL collaborated with PESI, Inc. (PESI) to market and host CSL’s online seminars and educational content in the IFS brand of psychotherapy. In March 2019, CSL and PESI executed the “PESI Contract” under which PESI would market and host CSL’s proprietary branded content, and the parties would work together to produce more authorized online content under CSL’s brand. At the same time, CSL and Anderson began negotiating a contract that would significantly expand and define his role with CSL and ultimately entered into the “Anderson Contract” in January 2020. The Anderson Contract provided that its term would end on December 31, 2020, but the parties continued to work under the contract through 2021, into 2022 and beyond.

However, by 2023, Anderson had begun conspiring with PESI to develop an unauthorized imitation Certification Program, and the two had recorded and launched his “Frank Anderson’s INTERNAL FAMILY SYSTEMS Trauma Treatment Program.” In 2024, Anderson notified Schwartz of his intentions to launch a certification program with PESI that was branded under CSL’s brand. CSL informed PESI and Anderson that they were not authorized to use CSL’s trademarks in connection with any training or certification program that was not affiliated with CSL. Thereafter, on April 16, 2025, Anderson informed CSL that he would no longer conduct the training programs on behalf of CSL. PESI continued to market on its website Anderson’s programs, including an unauthorized Certified IFS Trauma Clinician (IFST-C) certification, by falsely stating that he is a Lead Trainer at the IFS Institute under Schwartz, which intentionally misled and confused consumers as to PESI and Anderson’s affiliation with CSL.

In June 2025, Evergreen Certifications LLC (Evergreen), a wholly owned subsidiary of PESI publicly announced the launch of a new certification program titled “Evergreen Certified IFS Trauma Clinician (IFS-T-C).” At the time it was launched, the website falsely claimed: “Dr. Anderson is the Vice Chair, Director, and trainer for the Center for Self Leadership with Richard Schwartz, PhD.”

CSL sued PESI, Evergreen, Anderson and Frank G. Anderson M.D., Inc. (Anderson, Inc.) (collectively, Andersons) asserting six counts: a claim against all defendants for federal trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (Count I); a claim against all defendants for federal false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B) (Count II); a claim against all defendants for violations of Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (UDTPA) (Count III); a claim against all defendants for Illinois common law unfair competition (Count IV); a claim against Anderson for a breach of fiduciary duty (Count V); and a claim against PESI for breach of contract (Count VI). PESI and Evergreen moved to dismiss Counts I-IV and VI under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). The Andersons separately moved to dismiss Counts I-V under Rule 12(b)(6). CSL opposed both motions.

Count I and IV. In Count I, CSL alleged that PESI, Evergreen, Anderson and Anderson, Inc. (collectively, defendants’) unauthorized use of its IFS and INTERNAL FAMILY SYSTEMS trademarks constituted unfair competition and trademark infringement under the Lanham Act. In Count IV, CSL alleged that defendants’ use of CSL’s trademarks also constitutes unfair competition under Illinois common law. In Illinois, courts resolve unfair competition claims according to the principles set forth in the Lanham Act.

The court noted that CSL has not alleged that it registered the IFS and INTERNAL FAMILY SYSTEMS marks; it alleged that it has “common law rights” in those marks. To prevail on a claim under § 1125(a)(1)(A), “a plaintiff must establish that (1) its mark is protectable and (2) the defendant’s use of the mark is likely to cause confusion among consumers.” The defendants hinged their motions to dismiss on the first prong, arguing that CSL’s INTERNAL FAMILY SYSTEMS and IFS marks are not protectable. The court noted that it could not definitively say at this stage that the marks refer to a characteristic of CSL’s services, or that the marks do not require any imagination to connect them with the services, or even that the IFS mark is not arbitrary. Nor did the defendants’ appeal to CSL’s burden of proof or to cases finding other method-describing terms unprotectable help them here.

CSL contended that it exclusively offered training and certification services for decades; trained over 15,000 professionals on the IFS model and delivered introductory and educational programs on the IFS Model to tens of thousands more; strictly controlled certifications and credentials; and achieved widespread third-party recognition. The district court also noted that CSL alleged that consumers have a ‘mental association’ between the marks and CSL, which is sufficient to plead secondary meaning. Thus, the district court denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss Count I and Count IV.

Count II. The defendants argued that CSL’s false advertising claim was subject to the heightened pleading standards under Rule 9(b) because CSL alleged fraudulent conduct. CSL countered in response that even though the complaint “does use the word ‘fraudulent’ (three times),” Rule 9(b) does not apply because CSL’s “false advertising claims here do not sound in fraud and they are not based upon a course of fraudulent conduct.”

The defendants also argued that the alleged false statements were not actionable because they did not misrepresent the “nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin” of any goods or services. The court disagreed and noted that by allegedly making false statements about Anderson’s current affiliation with Schwartz and CSL, the defendants are plausibly misrepresenting the nature of the training and certification programs that they sell. Further, a potential customer would be more likely to pay for a training or certification program if they believe that the program is affiliated with individuals having particular credentials. Thus, CSL’s allegations were sufficient at this stage. Accordingly, the district court denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss Count II.

Count III. The defendants asserted that an UDTPA claim based on improper trademark use rises and falls with a Lanham Act trademark claim, which they argued fails. The court agreed with the underlying premise: “Illinois courts resolve UDTPA claims arising out of an alleged infringement of a mark under the same standard as the Lanham Act.” However, the defendants’ argument for dismissal failed because the Lanham Act trademark claim survived.

The court disagreed with the defendants’ contention that the UDTPA claim also failed because “there is nothing in the complaint to suggest that CSL’s UDTPA claim is based on conduct that occurred primarily and substantially in Illinois” because CSL pleaded enough facts to plausibly provide a “factual nexus with Illinois.” Therefore, the defendants’ motions to dismiss Count III was denied.

Count V. The court found that Anderson failed to show that nothing in the 2020 Anderson Contract would cause Anderson to owe fiduciary duties and denied Anderson’s motion to dismiss Count V.

Count VI. CSL alleged that the PESI Contract included a provision that “provides that new online content that needs to be developed for current or future online programming may be developed by CSL or in partnership with PESI,” and PESI breached this provision by “developing and hosting new online content using the IFS and INTERNAL FAMILY SYSTEMS trademarks on its own.” The court found that read in the context of the agreement, the “new online content” provision has nothing to do with mandatory exclusivity. Additionally, the contract says nothing about CSL’s trademarks or PESI developing and hosting its own content for separate programming. Thus, the court dismissed Count VI with prejudice.

The court also granted the Andersons’ motion to dismiss all claims against Anderson, Inc. without prejudice because CSL did not sufficiently plead what it alleges Anderson, Inc. did that was legally wrongful.

The Case is No. 1:25-cv-11339.

Judge: Gettleman, R.

Attorneys: Jeffrey Thomas Norberg (Neal & McDevitt, LLC) for The Center for Self Leadership, Inc. d/b/a IFS Institute. Naikang Tsao (Foley & Lardner LLP) for PESI, Inc. and Evergreen Certifications LLC. Jennifer L. Gregor (Godfrey & Kahn SC) for Frank Anderson.

Companies: The Center Self Leadership, Inc. d/b/a IFS Institute; Evergreen Certifications LLC

Cases: Trademark IllinoisNews