Keyston Global LLC v. Auto Essentials Inc et al
Filing
118
OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 117 Report and Recommendation. The October 1, 2014 Report is adopted. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment against Decor Essentials for $124,080 in favor of Keystone Global. Appellate review of this decision is unavailable because neither party filed written objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report. See Wagner & Wagner, LLP v. Atkinson, Haskins, Nellis, Brittingham, Gladd & Carwile, P.C., 596 F.3d 84, 92 (2d Cir. 2010). (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 1/16/2015) (mro)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------- X
:
KEYSTONE GLOBAL LLC,
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-v:
:
AUTO ESSENTIALS, INC.; DÉCOR
:
ESSENTIALS LTD. d/b/a BUMPER
:
ADVERTISEMENT; BUMPER BUSTER INC.
:
d/b/a BUMPER BUSTERS; CHARIOT
:
INTERNATIONAL, INC. d/b/a BUMPER
:
BADGER; KESEM LLC d/b/a
:
BUMPERSECURITY; R.R. LALENA CORP.; and :
WHEELS TO LEASE,
:
Defendants.
:
:
-------------------------------------- X
12cv9077 (DLC)
OPINION AND ORDER
ACCEPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
DENISE COTE, District Judge:
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“Report”)
from the Hon. Gabriel Gorenstein dated October 1, 2014,
recommending that Keystone Global LLC (“Keystone Global”) be
awarded a judgment of $124,080 -- $41,360 in damages, trebled
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 -- against Décor Essentials Ltd.
(“Décor Essentials”).
Keystone Global LLC v. Auto Essentials
Inc., No. 12cv9077 (DLC) (GWG), 2014 WL 4897104, at *4-5
(S.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 2014).
Report.
No objections have been made to the
For the following reasons, the Report is adopted.
BACKGROUND
Keystone Global is a New York limited liability company
that owns U.S. Patent Nos. 7,886,715 and 8,047,601 (the
“Patents-In-Suit”), both of which cover devices designed to
protect the rear bumper of a car from minor bumps and scrapes.
Décor Essentials is a New York corporation that, doing business
as “BumperAdvertisement,” sold on its website a product called a
“Bumper Shield.”
Twice -- on October 25, 2012 and November 7,
2012 -- Keystone Global notified Décor Essentials that the
“Bumper Shield” infringed its Patents-In-Suit and demanded that
Décor Essentials cease and desist sales of that product.
Despite this fair warning, Décor Essentials continued to sell
“Bumper Shields.”
On December 13, 2012, Keystone Global filed suit against
the defendants in this action, alleging infringement of its
Patents-In-Suit under 35 U.S.C. § 271.
Décor Essentials was
duly served on December 24, 2012, but never answered the
complaint.
Accordingly, on April 19, 2013, this Court entered
default against Décor Essentials, permanently enjoining it from
further infringement of the Patents-In-Suit and awarding damages
in an amount to be determined by inquest.
The determination of
damages was referred to Magistrate Judge Gorenstein on March 6,
2014, and Keystone Global was subsequently directed to file
findings of fact and conclusions of law, along with supporting
documentation, to support its request.
2
Décor Essentials was
given an opportunity to oppose that request; it did not.
On October 1, Magistrate Judge Gorenstein issued the Report
adopted here.
The Report recommends that Keystone Global be
awarded the $41,360 in damages it requests -- trebled to
$124,080 pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 -- but that it not be
awarded a requested $2,500 in attorneys’ fees because of a lack
of adequate documentation.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)
and Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties
had fourteen days from service of the Report to file any
objections.
Neither party objected.
DISCUSSION
When considering a report and recommendation, a district
court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
28
If timely
objection is made to any of the magistrate judge’s findings or
recommendations, district courts must make those determinations
de novo.
Id.
“To accept . . . a report to which no timely
objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy
itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.”
Alexis v. Griffin, No. 11cv5010 (DLC), 2014 WL 5324320, at *3
(S.D.N.Y. Oct. 20, 2014).
As no objection was made to
3
Magistrate Judge Gorenstein’s Report, it is reviewed for “clear
error.”
Magistrate Judge Gorenstein’s Report evinces no “clear
error.”
In evaluating Keystone Global’s request for monetary
relief, the Report correctly applies controlling law and
properly concludes that Keystone Global’s damages calculation is
reasonable.
Nor is there error in the Report’s conclusion that
damages should be trebled pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284.
As the
Report lucidly explains, Décor Essentials demonstrated the
willfulness of its infringement by a pattern of actions and
inactions -- chief among them its failure even to answer
Keystone Global’s complaint, and its resulting default.
Finally, there is no error in the Report’s recommendation
that Keystone Global not be awarded attorney’s fees.
While
Keystone Global would be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees,
Magistrate Judge Gorenstein correctly concluded that counsel did
not provide the supporting documentation required in this
Circuit.
See N.Y. State Ass'n for Retarded Children, Inc. v.
Carey, 711 F.2d 1136, 1148 (2d Cir. 1983) (“[A]ny attorney . . .
who applies for court-ordered compensation in this Circuit . . .
must document the application with contemporaneous time records
. . . specify[ing], for each attorney, the date, the hours
expended, and the nature of the work done.”).
4
CONCLUSION
The October 1, 2014 Report is adopted.
The Clerk of Court
shall enter judgment against Décor Essentials for $124,080 in
favor of Keystone Global.
Appellate review of this decision is
unavailable because neither party filed written objections to
the Magistrate Judge’s Report.
See Wagner & Wagner, LLP v.
Atkinson, Haskins, Nellis, Brittingham, Gladd & Carwile, P.C.,
596 F.3d 84, 92 (2d Cir. 2010).
SO ORDERED:
Dated:
New York, New York
January 16, 2015
__________________________________
DENISE COTE
United States District Judge
5
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?