Cooper et al v. Ningbo Xingqiang Metallic Products Co. Ltd.

Filing 52

ORDER Granting 29 Plaintiffs' MOTION for Order to Show Cause Regarding Contempt and Holding Defendant in Contempt of Court filed by Sandy Cooper, Garden Meadow, Inc. The Court therefore awards Garden Meadow damages and sanctions in th e amount of $150,000.00 for each of the six violations for a total amount of $900,000.00. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505, Garden Meadow is entitled to an award of attorneys' fees and costs. Based on the affidavit of Garden Meadow's counsel, the Court awards fees of $7,831.50. Signed by Judge Roger L. Hunt on 3/26/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

Case 2:11-cv-00745-RLH-CWH Document 51 Filed 03/25/13 Page 1 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

L. CHRISTOPHER ROSE, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 7500
Email: [e-mail]
TYLER N. URE, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 11730
Email: [e-mail]
JOLLEY URGA WIRTH WOODBURY & STANDISH
3800 Howard Hughes Pkwy., #1600
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Sandy Cooper
and Garden Meadow, Inc.

8
UNITED SATES DISTRICT COURT
Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish

3800 HOWARD HUGHES PARKWAY, SUITE 1600, LAS VEGAS, NV 89169
TELEPHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]

9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10
11

SANDY COOPER, an individual, GARDEN
MEADOW, INC., a Connecticut corporation,

12

Plaintiffs,

13

vs.

14

NINGBO XINGQIANG METALLIC
PRODUCTS CO., LTD., a Chinese company,

15

CASE NO. 2:11-cv-00745-RLH-GWF
(PROPOSED)
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE REGARDING CONTEMPT AND
HOLDING DEFENDANT IN CONTEMPT
OF COURT

Defendant.

16
17
18
19

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order to Show Cause Regarding Contempt
(Docket No. 29) and the Court’s Order to Show Cause Regarding Contempt (Docket No. 33).
For the reasons discussed below, and based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the

20
21
22

Court finds that Defendant is in contempt of court and grants Plaintiffs’ motion.
I.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

23

Plaintiffs Sandy Cooper and Garden Meadow, Inc. (“Garden Meadow”) filed this action

24

on May 10, 2011 against Defendant Ningbo Xingqiang Metallic Products Co., Ltd. (“Ningbo”)

25

alleging claims for copyright infringement and seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction

26

enjoining Ningbo from infringing upon Garden Meadow’s copyrighted works. (Docket No. 1).

27
Garden Meadow is engaged in the business of manufacturing and distributing solar products and

28
Page 1 of 5
C:\Documents and Settings\kom.WEBINATOR\Desktop\13-03-25 Proposed Order re Contempt.doc

Case 2:11-cv-00745-RLH-CWH Document 51 Filed 03/25/13 Page 2 of 5

1

garden accessories, and its copyrighted works include a variety of solar lighting, garden

2

sculptures, citronella candles, storage units and ice coolers, cabanas, and other outdoor living

3

products. Garden Meadow’s products are distributed worldwide and its consumers include

4
major domestic and international retailers. See id. Upon Garden Meadow’s application for a

5
6

restraining order and motion for a preliminary injunction (Docket Nos. 5-6), the Court issued a

and a preliminary injunction on May 25, 2011, likewise enjoining Ningbo from infringing on

9
Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish

temporary restraining order on May 11, 2011, to enjoin Ningbo’s infringement (Docket No. 8)

8
3800 HOWARD HUGHES PARKWAY, SUITE 1600, LAS VEGAS, NV 89169
TELEPHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]

7

Garden Meadow’s copyrighted works. (Docket No. 15). Ningbo was duly served with the

10

Complaint, Summons, Application for Temporary Restraining Order, Motion for Preliminary

11

Injunction, and the Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Regarding

12
13

Permanent Injunction at the Las Vegas Convention Center during the National Hardware Show.

14

(See Docket Nos. 5 and 9).

15

preliminary injunction. Furthermore, Ningbo did not appear at the show cause hearing to oppose

16

the requested injunctive relief. The Preliminary Injunction Order was granted and filed May 25,

17

2011. (Docket No. 15).

18

Ningbo did not oppose the temporary restraining order or

After Ningbo failed to respond to the Complaint, Garden Meadow filed its request for

19
entry of default. (Docket No. 16). Default was entered (Docket No. 17) and Garden Meadow

20
21

filed its application for default judgment. (Docket No. 19). The application for default judgment

22

and supporting declarations were likewise duly served upon Ningbo (Docket No. 23). On

23

September 2, 2011, this Court granted a Default Judgment against Ningbo, awarding Garden

24

Meadow damages, interest and attorneys’ fees. (Docket No. 24). Furthermore, in the default

25

judgment, the Court issued a permanent injunction enjoining Ningbo and its servants, agents,

26

employees, successors and assigns, and all persons acting in concert or privy with them, from

27
copying, making, manufacturing, using, possessing, selling, offering for sale, disclosing,

28
Page 2 of 5
C:\Documents and Settings\kom.WEBINATOR\Desktop\13-03-25 Proposed Order re Contempt.doc

Case 2:11-cv-00745-RLH-CWH Document 51 Filed 03/25/13 Page 3 of 5

1

exhibiting, reproducing, creating derivative works from, distributing, shipping, licensing,

2

developing, delivering, marketing, advertising, displaying or promoting any products that

3

infringe on Garden Meadow’s copyrighted works as enumerated in the default judgment. See id.

4
Ningbo was duly served with the default judgment on September 6, 2011. (Docket No. 27).

5
In April 2012, Garden Meadow found a number of Ningbo’s infringing products for sale

6

the website infringe upon six of Garden Meadow’s copyrighted works that were included in the

9
Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish

on a website, www.alibabba.com. (Docket No. 30). The six products Ningbo offered for sale on

8
3800 HOWARD HUGHES PARKWAY, SUITE 1600, LAS VEGAS, NV 89169
TELEPHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]

7

permanent injunction entered as part of the default judgment. (Docket Nos. 30 and 24). As a

10

result, Garden Meadow filed its motion to reopen this case and for an order to show cause

11

regarding contempt. (Docket No. 29). This Court granted the motion to reopen and issued an

12
13

order for Ningbo to appear and show cause why it should not be held in contempt of court.

14

(Docket No. 33). Ningbo was duly served with the Motion to Re-Open Case and the Order to

15

Show Cause Regarding Contempt, the Memorandum in support of that motion, and this Court’s

16

Order granting the motion to re-open and ordering Ningbo to show cause why it should not be

17

held in contempt of court. (Docket No. 42).

18

Ningbo did not file an opposition to Garden Meadow’s motion nor did Ningbo appear at

19
the show cause hearing on February 13, 2013.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26

II.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1.

The Factual Background and Procedural History above is hereby incorporated in

its entirety into the Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.
2.

Ningbo violated this Court’s Order (Docket No. 24) to appear before the Court

and show cause why Ningbo should not be held in contempt of court for violating the permanent
injunction.

27
28
Page 3 of 5
C:\Documents and Settings\kom.WEBINATOR\Desktop\13-03-25 Proposed Order re Contempt.doc

Case 2:11-cv-00745-RLH-CWH Document 51 Filed 03/25/13 Page 4 of 5

1
2
3

3.

Ningbo offered for sale a number of infringing products that infringe upon

Garden Meadow’s copyright in U.S. Copyright Registration Nos. VA 1-425-762, VA 1-668-337,
VA 1-747-291, VA 1-668-335, VAu 1-036-279, and VA 1-684-990.

4
4.

Ningbo’s conduct as set forth herein has at all times been willful, intentional,

5
6

malicious and in blatant disregard for Garden Meadow’s copyrights or this Court’s orders,

7

including the permanent injunction. Ningbo at all times was aware that its acts constituted

8

infringement of Garden Meadow’s copyrights.

Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish

3800 HOWARD HUGHES PARKWAY, SUITE 1600, LAS VEGAS, NV 89169
TELEPHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]

9
10
11

5.

Ningbo’s conduct is especially egregious given that this is the second time

Ningbo has infringed on the same copyrighted works at issue in this action. The willfulness and
egregious nature of Ningbo’s conduct is also demonstrated by a second action Garden Meadow

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

was required to file against Ningbo in this district regarding yet further alleged infringements,
Case Number 2:21-cv-00698-JCM-GWF, of which this Court takes judicial notice.
6.

Ningbo’s conduct as set forth herein constitutes a violation of the Permanent

Injunction. (Docket No. 24).
7.

Ningbo failed to show cause why it should not be held in contempt of court for

violating the permanent injunction.

19
8.

Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c), Garden Meadow is entitled to damages for

20
21

Ningbo’s contempt. 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(1) allows for statutory damages of up to $30,000 for

22

each copyright infringement, and 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(2) allows for statutory damages of as much

23

as $150,000 for each infringement when the infringement was committed willfully.

24
25
26

9.

In awarding damages set forth in the Default Judgment (Docket No. 24), this

Court found that Ningbo’s conduct was willful and awarded damages under 17 U.S.C. §
504(c)(2) in the amount of $150,000 for each infringement. (Docket Nos. 19 and 24).

27
28
Page 4 of 5
C:\Documents and Settings\kom.WEBINATOR\Desktop\13-03-25 Proposed Order re Contempt.doc

Case 2:11-cv-00745-RLH-CWH Document 51 Filed 03/25/13 Page 5 of 5

1
2
3
4

10.

Based on the papers and pleadings on file in this action, and the findings herein,

the Court finds that Ningbo acted willfully and deliberately in violating the Permanent Injunction
with full knowledge of the wrongful nature of its actions. The Court therefore awards Garden
150,000.00
Meadow damages and sanctions in the amount of $________________ for each of the six

5
6
7

900,000.00
violations for a total amount of $________________.
11.

Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505, Garden Meadow is entitled to an award of attorneys’

Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish

fees and costs. Based on the affidavit of Garden Meadow’s counsel, the Court awards fees of

9
3800 HOWARD HUGHES PARKWAY, SUITE 1600, LAS VEGAS, NV 89169
TELEPHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]

8

$7,831.50.

10

DATED this _____ day of March, 2013.
26th

11
12
13

______________________________________
______________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 5 of 5
C:\Documents and Settings\kom.WEBINATOR\Desktop\13-03-25 Proposed Order re Contempt.doc