Coty Inc. et al v. Excell Brands, LLC
| Coty Inc., Coty B.V., Calvin Klein Trademark Trust, Calvin Klein, Inc., Calvin Klein Cosmetics Corporation, Vera Wang Licensing LLC, V.E.W., Ltd. and Ate My Heart Inc. |
| Excell Brands, LLC |
| 1:2015cv07029 |
| September 4, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Jesse M. Furman |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1121 |
| 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
156
OPINION AND ORDER re: 95 MOTION in Limine, filed by Vera Wang Licensing LLC, Coty B.V., Coty Inc., Calvin Klein Cosmetics Corporation, Ate My Heart Inc., Calvin Klein Trademark Trust, Calvin Klein, Inc., V.E.W., Ltd., [ 90] MOTION in Limine, filed by Excell Brands, LLC. The Court concludes that Excell's knockoff fragrances "poach upon the commercial magnetism" of Coty's fragrances. More specifically, the Court finds that Coty has established its claims of trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and false advertising under both New York and federal law and is entitled to injunctive relief, an award of Excell's profits (including its profits for the period from Apr il 2016 until the last infringing fragrances were sold, as to which Excell is to provide an accounting), and reimbursement of its reasonable costs. The parties shall promptly meet and confer with respect to both Excell's accounting of its pro fits for the period from April 2016 until the last infringing fragrances were sold and Coty's reasonable costs. No later than two weeks from the date of this Opinion and Order, the parties shall submit a joint letter advising the Court of any disputes on either score and, in the case of a dispute, proposing a process to resolve it. By the same date, Coty shall submit a proposed judgment consistent with this Opinion and Order, including among other things the proposed terms of the in junction granted above. Excell shall have one week from the submission of Coty's proposed judgment to submit any objections in a letter brief, not to exceed three pages. The parties should advise the Court if there is any need for a conference. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket Nos. 90 and 95, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/18/2017) (ras)
|
|
Filing
83
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 72 MOTION for Sanctions filed by Vera Wang Licensing LLC, Coty B.V., Coty Inc., Calvin Klein Cosmetics Corporation, Ate My Heart Inc., Calvin Klein Trademark Trust, Calvin Klein, Inc., V.E.W., Ltd. In light of the foregoing, Plaintiffs' motion for sanctions is GRANTED. Specifically, exercising its broad discretion to craft appropriate sanctions, the Court precludes Excell from introducing any factual testimony or doc uments at trial regarding: (1) the ingredients and chemical compositions of the liquid scent (or "juice") of each fragrance at issue; (2) its compliance with applicable U.S. health, labeling, and consumer safety laws; and (3) tests or studies, including laboratory or scientific reports or quantitative or qualitative analyses concerning the juice or package of its fragrances. (Docket No. 72). Additionally, Excell is ordered to reimburse Plaintiffs for their "reasonable exp enses, including attorney's fees," caused by its failure to produce adequately prepared witnesses, including the attorney's fees incurred in connection with both Rule 30(b)(6) depositions (albeit discounted to reflect the fact that Excell's witnesses were apparently prepared to provide testimony on topics other than those discussed above), preparation of Plaintiff's June 2, 2016 letter motion (Docket No. 67), and preparation of this motion (Docket No. 72). Cou nsel shall confer in an effort to reach agreement on what constitutes "reasonable expenses." Barring agreement, Plaintiffs shall submit a fee application, supported by contemporaneous billing records, no later than thirty days from this Memorandum Opinion and Order; Excell shall file any opposition within two weeks of any application. Absent leave of Court, Plaintiffs may not file a reply. By Order entered on June 14, 2016, the Court directed the parties to submit their propos ed joint pretrial order and related materials within two weeks of the Court's ruling on the present motion. In light of the upcoming holidays, the Court extends that deadline to thirty days from the date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order . The parties should be prepared to go to trial approximately two weeks thereafter (although the Court's trial calendar may result in a later trial date). Moreover, the parties shall immediately advise the Court by joint letter if they are in terested in a referral to the assigned Magistrate Judge for purposes of settlement. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 72. (As further set forth in this Memorandum Opinion and Order.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/9/2016) (mro)
|
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.
