United States District Court, S.D. New York
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
For Rovio Entertainment, Ltd., Plaintiff: Ashly Erin Sands, LEAD ATTORNEY, Epstein Drangel LLP, New York, NY; Jason M. Drangel, LEAD ATTORNEY, Epstein Drangel LLP, New York, NY.
[114 U.S.P.Q.2d 1821] OPINION & ORDER
KATHERINE B. FORREST, United States District Judge.
On September 11, 2014, plaintiff Rovio Entertainment, Ltd. (" plaintiff," or " Rovio" ) filed this counterfeiting and trademark infringement action against defendants Allstar Vending Inc., Myrna Dorfman, Toy Amazon Corporation (" Toy Amazon" ), Han When Kuo, Yun Long Kuo a/k/a Johnson Kuo, and ten
Doe defendants, alleging that defendants have exploited and engaged in the unauthorized use of Rovio's copyrights and trademarks relating to the popular video game Angry Birds. (ECF No. 1 (" Compl." ).) Defendants Allstar Vending Inc. and Myrna Dorfman subsequently settled with plaintiff, and the action was discontinued as to them. (ECF No. 22.) Rovio served the complaint on Toy Amazon, Han When Kuo, and Yun Long Kuo (collectively, the " Toy Amazon defendants" ) on October 15-16, 2014. (ECF Nos. 7-11.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1)(A)(i), the latest deadline for any of the Toy Amazon defendants to answer plaintiff's complaint was November 6, 2014.
Under Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court must follow a two-step process before entering default judgment. First, under Rule 55(a), the Clerk of Court must determine that the party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to " plead or otherwise defend" itself, and then enter that party's default. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a). Second, under Rule 55(b)(2), the party seeking affirmative relief must apply to the court for a default judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2).
[114 U.S.P.Q.2d 1822] On November 10, 2014, Rovio obtained certificates of default against each of the Toy Amazon defendants. (ECF Nos. 16-18.) On January 30, 2015, Rovio filed a motion for default judgment against the Toy Amazon defendants, which Rovio served on them on February 2, 2015. (ECF Nos. 30, 35.) On February 4, 2015, the Court ordered the Toy Amazon defendants to appear and show cause why default judgment should not enter against them at a hearing on March 12, 2015. (ECF No. 36.) Rovio served this order and again served the default judgment motion materials on the Toy Amazon defendants on February 11, 2015. (ECF No. 37.) The Toy Amazon defendants did not appear at the March 12, 2015 hearing. To date, Toy Amazon, Han When Kuo, and Yun Long Kuo have failed to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint, and they have not appeared or sought to defend themselves at any time during this litigation.
For the reasons set forth below, the Court hereby enters default judgment and issues a permanent injunction as against the Toy Amazon defendants.
A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction
This Court has federal subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § § 1331 & 1338 in that the case arises out of claims under the federal copyright and trademark laws.
B. Personal Jurisdiction
This Court looks to the law of the forum state in determining whether it has personal jurisdiction over defendants. Licci v. Lebanese Canadian Bank, 732 F.3d 161, 168 (2d Cir. 2013). This Court may only exercise personal jurisdiction over a foreign defendant if doing so is consistent with the Constitution's due process protections. Id.
1. New York long-arm statute.
" [B]efore a court grants a motion for default judgment, it may first assure itself that it has personal jurisdiction over the defendant . . . ."
Sinoying Logistics Pte Ltd. v. Yi Da Xin Trading Corp., 619 F.3d 207, 213 (2d Cir. 2010) (citations omitted). Under New York's long-arm statute, " a court may exercise personal jurisdiction over any non-domiciliary . . . who in person ...