Audemars Piguet Holding S.A. et al v. Swiss Watch International, Inc. et al
| Audemars Piguet Holding S.A. and Audemars Piguet (North America) Inc. |
| Swiss Watch International, Inc., ILS Holdings, LLC and Lior Ben-Shmuel |
| 1:2012cv05423 |
| July 13, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of U.S. |
| Harold Baer |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1114 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
223
OPINION AND ORDER. For the reasons discussed in this Opinion and Order, Judge Baer's conclusion that the enjoined watches are counterfeit is reversed upon reconsideration and the final judgment will be modified to reflect an award of single, not treble profits. The additional Trimix watch models, SL-10540 and SL-10542, will be added to the list of specific models to be enjoined but will not be added to the recall order. re: 200 MOTION to Amend/Correct 199 Judgment Notice of Def endants' Motion to Amend and Clarify the Judgment and to Stay Enforcement of Monetary Damages filed by Lior Ben-Shmuel, Swiss Watch International, Inc., ILS Holdings, LLC, 207 CROSS MOTION to Amend/Correct 200 MOTION to Amen d/Correct 199 Judgment Notice of Defendants' Motion to Amend and Clarify the Judgment and to Stay Enforcement of Monetary Damages. To Amend or Clarify Portions of the J filed by Audemars Piguet Holding S.A., Audemars Piguet (North America) Inc. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 1/12/2015) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
165
OPINION & ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, judgment will be entered in favor of Plaintiffs on the Lanham Act claims of trademark infringement, common law unfair competition and New York General Business Law trademark dilution. For the reasons set fo rth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall have judgment against Defendants, and further that: 1. This court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.2. Defendants have infringed Plaintiffs ' Royal Oak trade dresses, have diluted the Royal Oak trademarks and have engaged in acts of unfair competition against Plaintiffs. 3. Defendants are permanently enjoined from manufacturing, importing, distributing, shipping, advertising, market ing, promoting, selling or offering for sale any product bearing Plaintiffs' Royal Oak Trade trade including U.S. Trademark Registrations Nos. 2,866,069, No. 3,480.826. No. 4,232,239 and No. 4,232,240, or any trade dress similar thereto or likely to cause confusion therewith, in the sale, offering for sale, distribution or advertising of any products. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Harold Baer on 1/06/2014) (ama)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
