HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
-
Upload
mark-h-jaffe -
Category
Documents
-
view
239 -
download
0
Transcript of HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
-
8/10/2019 HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
1/9
n i
^uu i _ r
uTI
\ik_6
y
JS44C/SDNY
REV. 4/2014
PLAINTIFFS
H Young (Operations) Limited
CIVIL CO VER SHEE
4
irierrepleree-nor supplement the
he
JS-44 civil cover
sheet and
the information contained herein
neitJieTrepWBVnor supplement
the
filing and si __
pleadings or
other
papers as
required
by law, except as provided by local
rules
of
court.
This form, approved by trie
Judicial Conferenceof the
United
States inSeptember 1974,is
required
foruse ofthe ClerkofCourtforthe purpose of
initiating the civildocket sheet.
J^4 9 9
OCT 2 4
DEFENDANTS
Target Corporation and Steven Madden, Ltd.
ATTORNEYS (FIRM
NAME,
ADDRESS, AND
TELEPHONE
NUMBER ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)
Cowan,
Liebowitz &
Latman, P.C.
1133 Avenue
of
th e
Americas , New
York, NY
10036
(212)790-9200
CAUSEOF
ACTION
(CITE
THE U.S. CIVIL
STATUTE UNDERWHICH YOU ARE FILING
AND
WRITE ABRIEF STATEMENT OFCAUSE?
(DONOT CITEJURISDICTIONAL
STATUTES
UNLESS
DIVERSITY)
Copyright Infringement
Has
this
action, case, or proceeding, or one essentially the
same
been previously filed in SDNY at any time? Nt esL-Uudge
Previously
Assigned
If
yes,
was
this
case Vol. Invol. Dismissed. No Yes [~J If yes,
give
date.
I S T H IS AN INTERNATIONALARBITRATION CASE? No 0 Yes \_\
& Cas e
No .
PLACEAN[x] INONEBOX
ONLY
TORTS
CONTRACT
PERSONAL INJURY
I
1110
I N SU RAN C E
( J310 AIRPLANE
[ 1120
M A R IN E
| ]315 AIRPLANE PRODUCT
[ 1130
MILLER AC T
LIABILITY
I 1140
NEGOTIABLE
| J 320 ASSAULT, LIBEL
I N STRU MEN T
SLANDER
I 1150
RECOVERY OF
| | 330 FEDERAL
O V E R P A Y M E N T
E M P L O Y E R S
ENFORCEMENT
LIABILITY
O F J U D GM E N T | J310 MARINE
I 1151
M E D IC A R E
AC T
( ]345
MARINE
PRODUCT
[ )152
RECOVERY OF L I A B I L I T Y
D E F A U L T E D
[ ]350 MOTOR VEHICLE
S T U DE N T L O A NS | ) 355 MOTOR VEHICLE
(EXCL VETERANS)
PRO D U C T LIABILITY
11153
RECOVERY OF
[ ]360 OTHER PERSONAL
O VERPAYMENT IN JU R Y
OF V E T E R A N S
[ ] 362 PERSONAL INJURY -
BEN EFI TS
ME D
MALPRAC TI C E
[
]160
S T O C K H O L D E R S
SU I TS
[ 1190
O T H E R
C O N T R A C T
[ J1 95
C O N T R A C T
PRO D U C T
A C T I O N S U N D E R
STATUTES
LIABILITY
[ )196 FRANCHISE
CIVIL RIGHTS
[ ] 440 OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS
Non-Prisoner)
R E A L P R O P E R TY
( ]441 VOTING
I 1210
L A N D
( )442 EMPLOYMENT
CONDEMNATION
| j 443HOUSING
[
]220
F O R E C L O S U R E
AC C O MMO D ATI O N S
( ]230
R EN T L E A S E
[ ] 445 AMERICANS WITH
EJECTMENT
DISABILITIES -
I I 240
TORTS
TO
LAND
EMPLO YMEN T
I I 2 45
TORT PRO D U C T
[
]446
AMERICANS WITH
LIABILITY
DISABILITIES - O TH ER
[ ]290
AL L O T H E R
R E A L PROPERTY
[ J448 EDUCATION
Checkifdemanded in complaint:
CHECK IF
THIS
IS ACLASS ACTION
UNDER
F.R .C .P . 23
DEMAND $
OTHER
Check YES
onlyifdemandedincomplaint
JURY DEMAND: DYES LNO
NATURE OF SUIT
PERSONAL
INJURY FORFEITURE/PENALTY
[ )367 HEALTHCARE/
PHARMACEUTICAL PERSONAL, , 625 DRUGRELATED
INJURY/PRODUCT
LIABILITY S|2URE QF
PR0PERTy
[ ] 365
PERSONAL INJURY
21 USC881
PRODUCT
LIABILITY
. , ,, OTHER
[]
368 ASBESTOS
PERSONAL '
I 1
INJURY PRODUCT
LIABILITY
PERSONAL PROPERTY
[ ]370 OTHER FRAUD
[ ] 371 TRUTH INLENDING
( J380 OTHER PERSONAL
PROPERTY DAMAGE
[ J385 PROPERTY DAMAGE
PRODUCT
LIABILITY
PRISONER PETITIONS
[ ] 463 ALIENDETAINEE
[ ]510 MOTIONSTO
VACATE SENTENCE
28 US C
55
[ ] 530 HABEAS
CORPUS
[ ] 535 DEATH PENALTY
| ] 540 MANDAMUS &OTHER
PRISONER
CIVIL
RIGHTS
[ ) 550 CIVILRIGHTS
[ ] 555 PRISON CONDITION
[ J 560 CIVILDETAINEE
LABOR
[ J710 FAIRLABOR
STANDARDS
AC T
| ] 720 LABOR/MGMT
RELATIONS
I ] 7 40
RAILWAY
LABORACT
| ] 751 FAMILYMEDICAL
LEAVE ACT (FMLA)
( ] 790 OTHER LABOR
LITIGATION
| ] 7 91 EMPL RET INC
SECURITY AC T
IMMIGRATION
| ] 462 NATURALIZATION
APPLICATION
| ] 465 OTHER IMMIGRATION
ACTIONS
CONDITIONS
OF
CONFINEMENT
ACTIONS UNDERSTATUTES
BANKRUPTCY
| ] 422 APPEAL
8 U SC
5 8
| ] 423 WITHDRAWAL
28 US C 15 7
PROPERTY RIGHTS
Dd
820 COPYRIGHTS
| ] 830 PATENT
| ]840 TRADEMARK
SOCIAL
SECURITY
[ ] 861 HIA(1395ff)
[ ] 862 BLACKLUNG (923)
| ) 863 DIWC/DIWW(405(g))
[ ]
864 SSID
TITLE XVI
[ ]865 RSI (405(g) )
FEDERALTAXSUITS
[ ]870 TAXES (U.S. Plaintiffor
Defendant)
( )871 IRS-THIRD PARTY
2 6 U SC
7609
OTHER STATUTES
I ) 375 FALSE CLAIMS
( j400STATE
REAPPORTIONMENT
1 J410 ANTITRUST
[ 1430 BANKS&BANKING
[ 1450 COMMERCE
[ ] 460 DEPORTATION
[ )470 RACKETEER INFLU
ENCED & CORRUPT
ORGANIZAT ION ACT
(RICO)
( ]480 CONSUMER CREDIT
| ]490 CABLE/SATELLITE TV
| ] 850 SECURITIES/
COMMODITIES/
EXCHANGE
) 890 OTHER STATUTORY
ACTIONS
] 891 AGRICULTURAL ACTS
) 893 ENVIRONMENTAL
MATTERS
] 895 FREEDOM OF
INFORMAT ION ACT
]
896
ARBITRATION
] 899 ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURE ACT/REVIEW
OR
APPEAL OF
AGENCY DECISION
[ ] 950 CONSTITUTIONALITYOF
STATE
STATUTES
DO
YOU
CLAJM
THIS CASE
IS
RELATED
TO A CIVIL CASE
NOW PENDING
IN
S.D.N.Y.?
JUDGE
DOCKET NUMBER
NOTE: You must also submit at the time of fil ingthe
Statement
of Relatedness form (Form IH-32).
-
8/10/2019 HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
2/9
PLACE
ANx IN
ONEBOX
ONLY
LEJ 1 Original LJ 2
Removed
from
LJ 3
Remanded
Proceeding
state
court from
f j
a. all
parties
represented Appellate
| | b. At
least
one
party
Is
pro
se.
PL CE N
x
INONEBOXONLY
BASIS
OF
JURISDICTION
1 US PLAINTIFF 2
U.S. DEFENDANT [*]
3
FEDERAL QUESTION Q4 DIVERSITY
(U.S. NOT A PARTY)
O RI G I N
| | 4
Reinstated
or Q 5
Transferred
from
6 Multidistrict
Reopened (Specify
District)
Litigation
I I 7 Appeal to
District
Judge from
Magistrate Judge
Judgment
IFDIVERSITY, INDICATE
CITIZENSHIP
ELOW
CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (FOR
DIVERSITY
CASES
ONLY)
(Placean
[X]
inone boxforPlaintiff and one boxforDefendant)
PT F
DE F
CITIZEN OF THIS STATE ( ] 1 [ ] 1
CITIZENOF ANOTHER STATE ( ] 2 [ ] 2
CITIZEN OR SUBJECT OF
A
FOREIGN COUNTRY
PT F
DE F
[
]3 [
]3
PT F DEF
INCORPORATED
and
PRINCIPAL PLACE [ ] 5 [ ] 5
OF BUSINESS IN ANOTHER STATE
INCORPORATED or PRINCIPAL PLACE [ ] 4 [ ) 4
OF BUSINESS IN THIS STATE
FOREIGN
NATION
PLAINTIFF(S) ADDRESS(ES)AND COUNTY(IES)
HYoung (Operations) Limited
Buckingham House,
West Street
Newbury, Berkshire, RG14 1BD
United Kingdom
DEFENDANT(S) ADDRESS(ES)
AND
COUNTY(IES)
Target Corporation
1000
Nicollet
Mall
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403
Hennepin County
Steven Madden, Ltd.
52-16 Barnet t Avenue
Long Island City, NewYork 11104
Queens County
[ ]6
REPRESENTATION ISHEREBY MADE THAT, AT THIS TIME, IHAVE BEEN UNABLE, WITH REASONABLE
DILIGENCE,
TOASCERTAIN
RESldENCE ADDRESSES OF THE FOLLOWING DEFENDANTS:
Checkone:
THIS ACTION SHOULD
BE
ASSIGNED TO:
WHITE PLAINS
S
MANHATTAN
(DO NOT checkeitherbox ifthisa PRISONER PETITION/PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS
COMPLAINT.)
DATE 10/23/14 SIGnRtURE OF,ATTORNEY
OF RECORD
ADMITTED
TO PRACTICE IN
THIS DISTRICT
~ [ ] NO
[Xj
YES (DATE ADMITTED Mo. April Yr.
1994
)
RECEIPT ( \ ) I \
Attorney
Bar
Code
Magistrate
Judge
is
to be desigrWecKby the Clerk of the Co|^|j, JUiAii, 1 4 ^Ul
Magistrate
Judge
is so Designated.
Ruby J. Krajick,Clerk of Court by
Deputy Clerk, DATED
UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT (NEW YORK SOUTHERN)
Clear
Fo rm
Sa v e
Pr in t
-
8/10/2019 HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
3/9
JUDGE OETKEH
DifrlfcT
coift 4: \3
RIC*
OF
N EW
Y O R K
IN THE UNITED
S TATES
FOR THE SOUTHEr| i|tRI >^o Oa>i:
V.
V V / V / v ^ v> . v .
HYOuses this lone detail both as a brand identifier and as a marker to identify potential
infringements where the copying is so scrupulous as to appropriate even this lone element.
12. Products bearing the HYO have been distributed internationally and have been
readily available in many markets. Those products include various handbags, tops, jackets, t-
shirts, dresses and belts, sample images
of
which are attached as Exhibit C.
Defendants Infringing Activities
13. HYO has recently learned that Target has advertised, promoted, and sold at least
two differently-styled bags under the MOSSIMO name bearing a fabric design copied from and
strikingly similar to the HYO Design (the Infringing Products ). These two infringing bags,
juxtaposed to the HYO Design from which they copy, appear below:
30430/000/1546450.
-
8/10/2019 HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
6/9
In f r ing ing Produc t s
H Y P Design
30430/000/1546450.
-
8/10/2019 HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
7/9
14. Notably,
the first of
the Infringing Products
(appearing inblue above) even
goes
so far as to
copy
the five-petaled ANIMAL logo appearing one time in the HYO
Design, as
depicted below.
HYP Flower Logo Infringing Products Detail
15.
Upon information
and
belief, Madden supplied the first of the two Infringing
Products (appearing
in
blue
above)
to
Target
for
resale under
Target s
MOSSIMO line.
HYO
has not yet determined Target s
supplier
for the second of the Infringing Products.
16.
The
Infringing Products
bear
designs that are
virtually identical,
strikingly
similar
replicas ofthe
HYO
Design. Indeed, itisnot plausible that Target, Madden orany supplier
from
whom they might
have sourced the Infringing Products
or
patterns appearing
thereon, could
have
arrived
at these infringing designs without reference to
the HYO
Design.
17. The fact that even the single ANIMAL logo
was
replicated isdamning
proof
that
these designs werecopied from theHYO Design.
18.
Upon information and
belief, Defendants and/or
their suppliers for the Infringing
Products
had
access to
and
copied
the HYO
Design. Moreover, the
striking
similarity between
the designs on the
Infringing
Products and the HYO Design make any source
other
than copying
not reasonably possible.
30430/000/1546450.1
-
8/10/2019 HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
8/9
CLA IM FPR
RELIEF
- CPPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
19. HYOrepeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-18 of the
Complaint withthe same force andeffectas if set forthfullyhereinandincorporates such
allegations by reference herein.
20. Byvirtueof the conduct as described above,Defendantshave infringedHYO's
exclusive copyright rights in the HYO Design under the Copyright Act.
21. By the acts complained of, Defendants have made profits and gains to which they
are not in law or equity entitled.
22. The infringements
of
HYO's copyright rights in the HYO Designhave damaged
andwill continueto damageHYO and cause it irreparable harm. HYO has no adequate remedy
a t l aw .
R E PU E ST F P R
REL IEF
WHEREFORE, HYO demands judgment as follows:
A. Ordering that Defendants, their agents, officers, servants, employees, successors
and/or assigns, and all persons or companies in active concert and/or participation with them, be
permanently enjoined from reproducing, making, reprinting, publishing, displaying,
manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, promoting, advertising, distributing and/or
commercially exploiting in any manner, either directly or indirectly, any products on which are
imprintedor which display unauthorized copies
of
the HYODesign or any designs substantially
similar thereto, including without limitation the Infringing Products;
B. Awarding HYO all damages suffered by HYO as a result
of
Defendants'
infringing acts, and all profits derived from Defendants' infringing acts in an amount to be
30430/000/1546450.
-
8/10/2019 HYO Design v. Target - copyright design.pdf
9/9
determined at the trial of this action; or in lieuof suchdamages andprofits, should
HYO
so elect,
an award of statutory damages, as provided by 17U.S.C. 504(c);
C. Ordering thatDefendants deliver to HYOfor destruction all products, designs,
brochures, catalogues, meansof manufacture and/or othermaterials in Defendant's possession or
control, which, if sold, distributed or used in any waywould violate paragraphA above; and
D. Awarding HYO attorneys' fees, costs and disbursements in this action;
E. Awarding HYO prejudgment and post-judgment interest.
F. For such other and further relief as the Courtmay deemjust and proper.
Dated: New
York, New York
October 23 , 2014
30430/000/1546450.1
COWAN, I^EBQWIT^ LATMAN, P.C.
y A|
n/1
Johajnan
Z Kin
24943
59)
1133
Avel^ of
the
A^ritas
New York, New York
10036-6799
(212)790-9200
Attorneys for
Plaintiff
H Young (Operations) Limited