Casino operator Wynn Resorts has filed for trademark protection of its in-development casino project in Everett, Massachusetts.
On Monday, Boston Business Journal reported that Wynn had applied to the US Patent & Trademark Office to acquire the rights to the name Wynn Boston Harbor. The $2b project, which expects to break ground in July, was formerly known as Wynn Everett. The application was filed on March 15, the same day company CEO Steve Wynn gave reporters a preview of the property’s layout.
In less positive news, Steve’s ex-wife Elaine Wynn filed an amended lawsuit against her former hubby on Monday. The suit seeks to reestablish her control over her 9.4% stake in Wynn Resorts, which she hasn’t had since divorcing Steve for the second time in 2010.
The couple signed an agreement that same year giving Steve control over their combined shares, which allowed him to wield control of the company, particularly following the unceremonious forced redemption of Kazuo Okada’s holdings in 2012, a Pearl-Harbor-in-reverse surprise attack that remains before the courts to this day.
Elaine originally filed her lawsuit as a counterclaim to the suit Wynn Resorts filed against Okada, claiming that Steve was attempting to exercise “full and perpetual control” over her life by dictating what she could and couldn’t do with her Wynn stock, which is worth around $900m. The stock had been worth significantly more before Macau’s revenue slump dragged down the share price of all its casino operators.
Elaine was ousted from Wynn’s board of directors last spring after Steve accused her of breaching their 2010 agreement by transferring $10m of her Wynn shares to a charitable foundation under her control without first gaining Steve’s permission. Elaine now says her ouster breached that same 2010 agreement, rendering it null and void.
On Monday, Steve’s peeps issued a typically blunt statement, calling Elaine “a disappointed ex-wife” looking to “inflict personal pain on Mr. Wynn” and “compromise the corporate stability and financial health” of the company. The response also characterized her legal claims as “filled with lies and distortions” and should be “an embarrassment to Ms. Wynn and her counsel.” So, no third time’s the charm for these two spitfires, huh?