Gianni Versace, S.p.A. et al v. Versace 19.69 Abbigliamento Sportivo SRL et al

Filing 170

ORDER STRIKING LICENSEE DEFENDANTS 162 ANSWER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 8/17/2017. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/17/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
GIANNI VERSACE, S.P.A., et al.,

7

Plaintiffs,

8
v.

9

VERSACE 19.69 ABBIGLIAMENTO
SPORTIVO SRL, et al.,

10
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No.16-cv-03617-HSG
ORDER STRIKING LICENSEE
DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Re: Dkt. No. 162

Defendants.

12
Plaintiffs Gianni Versace, S.p.A. and Versace USA, Inc. have sued ten different defendants

13
14

in this action, of which only three are relevant to this order: V1969 Versace SMO, LLC; V1969

15

Versace HG, LLC; and V1969 USA, LLC (collectively “Licensee Defendants”). 1 See Dkt. No.

16

123 ¶¶ 6–16. On July 14, 2017, the Court granted the motion to withdraw filed by Licensee

17

Defendants’ counsel, Adam S. Rossman. Dkt. No. 158. As ordered, the Licensee Defendants

18

filed their answer to the amended complaint shortly thereafter. Dkt. No. 162. However, they did

19

not obtain substitute counsel, despite being given 30 days to do so and despite being on notice that

20

they cannot appear in federal court without counsel. See Dkt. No. 158 at 3.
Therefore, for the reasons articulated in the order granting the motion to withdraw, the

21
22

Court STRIKES the Licensee Defendants’ answer and will allow Plaintiffs to seek entry of

23

default and a default judgment against the Licensee Defendants. See id. If Plaintiffs intend to

24

seek entry of default, they must do so by August 25, 2017. If default is entered, the Court will set

25

a schedule for the filing of a motion for default judgment. Until further notice by the Court,

26
27
28

1

Over the course of this litigation, these same defendants have collectively been referred to as
both the “LVBHQ Defendants” and the “Licensee Defendants.” Compare, e.g., Dkt. No. 61
(former) with Dkt. No. 115 (latter).

1

Attorney Rossman shall continue accepting service of papers to the Licensee Defendants for

2

forwarding purposes. See Civil L.R. 11-5(b).

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 8/17/2017

5
6
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2