Overstock.com, Inc. v. Visocky et al

Filing 134

ORDERED that judgment in favor of plaintiff Overstock.com, Inc. be and is entered against defendant Edward M. Kaufman under Rule 54(b) of Fed. R. Civ. P. See Order for more details. Signed by District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema on 12/27/2018. (rban, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Alexandria Division

OVERSTOCK.COM,INC.,
Plaintiff,

l:17-cv-01331 (LMB/TCB)

V.

VIKTOR VISOCKY,etal.
Defendants.
ORDER

On December 7,2018, a magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation [Dkt.
No. 130](the "Report")in which she recommended that a defaultjudgment be entered against

defendant Edward M. Kaufman("Kaufman") permanently enjoining him from engaging in a
scheme to "rip" content from plaintiff Overstock.com, Inc.'s websites. The Report advised the
parties that any objection to the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations must be filed

within 14 days of its service and that failure to file timely objections would waive appellate
review ofany judgment based on the Report. As of December 27, 2018, neither party has filed an
objection.

The Court laid out the background of this civil action in a previous Memorandum

Opinion [Dkt, No. 112] and Order [Dkt. No. 113] entering a defaultjudgment and permanent
injunction against other named defendants and need not repeat those facts in this Order.' At

issue here is whether a defaultjudgment and permanent injunction are now appropriate as to
defendant Kaufman. In the Report, the magistrate judge correctly found that the Court has valid

' The other named defendants have since been held in contempt for willfully violating the
permanent injimction [Dkt. No. 132].