OPINION & ORDER
KATHERINE B. FORREST, District Judge.
On June 28, 2012, Plaintiffs Richemont North America, Inc. ("Richemont NA"), Cartier International A.G., and Cartier, a division of Richemont NA (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed this action against Defendants Linda Lin Huang a/k/a Lin Juan Huang a/k/a Lin Wei Huang a/k/a Lee a/k/a Lin Lee ("Lee"), Xiao Kang Lu a/k/a George Lu ("George Lu"), Richard Lu, Katherine Chan Lo a/k/a Catherine Lo a/k/a Chan Lo ("Chan Lo"), Shun Da Enterprises d/b/a New York China Town Souvenirs Gift Center, John and Jane Does A-Z (unidentified), and XYZ Companies 1-10 (unidentified), alleging that Defendants manufacture, market, and sell counterfeit versions of Plaintiffs' products in violation of federal and state law. (See Compl. ¶ 2.)
At this time, Defendant Chan Lo is the only remaining Defendant in this action. Plaintiffs now move for summary judgment against Defendant Chan Lo on all claims contained in their Complaint. For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment.
The following facts are undisputed, except where otherwise noted. Cartier International A.G. "is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the common law trademarks and federally registered trademarks... associated with the Cartier brand." (Pls.' Rule 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 1.) Plaintiff Cartier, a division of Richemont NA, is the exclusive distributor of Cartier branded products in the United States. (Id. ¶ 3.)
The Cartier brand is a well-known international luxury brand. (Id. ¶ 6-7, 12-14.) Cartier watches are sold bearing, inter alia, two Cartier trademarks associated with Registration Nos. 411, 975 and 759, 201. (Id. ¶ 9.) Plaintiffs have "expended substantial time, money[, ] and resources in developing, advertising[, ] and promoting" their trademarked products. (Id. 10.)
In June of 2009, Plaintiffs hired a private investigator, Thomas Yeepun ("Yeepun"), to investigate the counterfeiting of Plaintiffs' goods in the Canal Street area of New York City. (Id. ¶¶ 16, 17.) After several months of research, Yeepun discovered that Defendants Lee, George Lu, Richard Lu, and N.Y. China Town Souvenir Gift Center, located at 49 Mott Street, New York, New York, 10013 ("49 Mott Street"), were selling counterfeit Cartier watches. (Id. ¶¶ 18, 19.) Plaintiffs allege that from June 2009 through February 2012, Yeepun spoke with and visited Defendant Lee on a regular basis at 49 Mott Street; he also allegedly purchased numerous counterfeit Cartier watches during that time. (Id. ¶¶ 19-21.)
In November 2011, Yeepun introduced Lee to James Perrone ("Perrone"), another private investigator retained by Plaintiffs, who then became the primary point of contact with Lee. (Id. ¶¶ 22, 23.)
On March 19, 2012, Yeepun and Perrone made a pre-arranged visit to Lee at 49 Mott Street to execute a purchase of 100 counterfeit Cartier watches. (Id. ¶ 33.) Perrone and Yeepun inspected the watches Lee had available for purchase. (Id. ¶¶ 34-35.) Perrone told Lee he wanted additional styles of watches. (Id. ¶ 36.) Lee made a phone call and indicated that she would have more styles available that night or in the morning. (Id.) Perrone then left 49 Mott Street, while Yeepun remained in the store. (Id. ¶¶ 37-38.)
While Perrone was out, an individual identified by Plaintiffs as Defendant Chan Lo arrived at the 49 Mott Street with between seven and 10 watches (the "Chan Lo watches"). (Id. ¶ 38.) When Perrone returned to the store, Lee allegedly offered him the Chan Lo watches. (Id. ¶ 39.) Perrone inspected the Chan Lo watches and determined that they bore the Cartier trademark and were counterfeits. (Id. ¶ 40.) Perrone purchased 68 watches for $6, 800. (Id. ¶ 42.)
Sophie Ortolano, an expert at detecting counterfeit versions of Plaintiffs' watches, examined 51 of the watches purchased by Perrone and determined that they were, in fact, counterfeits of Cartier watches. (Id. ¶ 42.)
The following explains the procedural history insofar as it implicates Defendant Chan Lo.
On June 6, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint, as well as an application for a Temporary Restraining Order, an Order Restraining Assets, an Order for Expedited Discovery, an Order for a Civil Search and Seizure, an Order Sealing the File, and an Order to Show Cause for Preliminary Injunction (the ...