Transcience et al v. Big Time Toys, LLC

Filing 203

OPINION AND ORDER re: 195 LETTER MOTION for Leave to File addressed to Judge Edgardo Ramos from William Timmons dated 4-17-2017 filed by Yolanda Von Braunhut. On April 7, 2017, Plaintiff filed a letter seeking a confere nce to address (1) whether Defendant's expert should be permitted to testify; (2) whether Plaintiff's proposed expert should be permitted to testify; (3) whether Plaintiff sufficiently pled a New York common law trademark infring ement claim; (4) and if not sufficiently pled, whether Plaintiff could be granted leave to amend the pleadings; and (5) whether punitive damages may be asserted for Plaintiff's trademark infringement claim. Doc. 173. The parties also requ ested that the Court determine whether Plaintiff was the owner of the trademarks, and therefore had standing to pursue the trademark infringement claim under the Lanham Act. For the reasons stated on the record at the April 20, 2017 conferenc e, the Court orders the following: Plaintiff's request to exclude Defendant's expert's testimony is DENIED. Defendant's expert is permitted to testify on the issue of damages, including on the value of the trademarks a t issue as registered and not registered and Plaintiff's purported damages. Plaintiff's request to amend her pleadings to include such a claim is DENIED. The Second Amended Complaint does not adequately assert a New York common law trademark infringement claim. Plaintiff's request to include a jury instruction on punitive damages is DENIED. Defendant's motion to dismiss the federal trademark infringement claim is GRANTED. Plaintiff failed to adequately show that she was the owner of the trademarks at the time the Complaint was filed. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions, Docs. 195, 197. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 4/24/2017) (mro)

Download PDF

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?