Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
11
12
13 NICOLE, INC.,
Plaintiff,
14
15
v.
Plaintiff NICOLE, INC. (Nicole Lee), for its causes of action against
7 creating handbags with unique and fashion forward designs, pushing the envelope in
8 fashion trends. Drawing inspiration from New Yorks dynamic lifestyle and Los
9 Angeles casual yet trendy street fashion, Nicole Lee has gained renown for its high10 end contemporary bags, which can be found in thousands of boutique shops
11 throughout the United States and abroad.
12
2.
3.
Nicole Lee thus brings this action to protect its valuable rights and to
PARTIES
4.
23 of business at 1133 S. Boyle Ave., Los Angeles, California 90023. Nicole, Inc.
24 owns the trademark Nicole Lee and manufactures and sells handbags, jewelry,
25 shoes, and accessories under the brand name Nicole Lee.
26
5.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
-1-
1 90023. Upon information and belief, BLK owns the brand names BLK and Michael
2 Michelle, and manufactures and sells, among other things, the infringing wallets and
3 handbags that are the subject of this action.
4
6.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
7.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
9 Defendants DOES 1 through 10 are either entities or individuals who have infringed
10 Nicole Lees intellectual property rights, by manufacturing, selling, or distributing
11 infringing products, or are principals or supervisory employees of entities or
12 individuals who have infringed Nicole Lees intellectual property rights, by
13 manufacturing, selling, or distributing infringing products. The true names, whether
14 corporate, individual or otherwise, of DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are presently
15 unknown to Nicole Lee, who therefore sues these DOE defendants by fictitious
16 names, and will seek leave to amend this Complaint to show their true names and
17 capacities when they have been ascertained.
18
8.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that at all
19 relevant times each of the Defendants was the agent, affiliate, officer, director,
20 manager, principal, alter ego, and/or employee of the remaining Defendants and was
21 at all times acting within the scope of the agency, affiliation, alter-ego relationship
22 and/or employment; and actively participated in or subsequently ratified and
23 adopted, or both, each and all of the acts or conduct alleged, with full knowledge of
24 all the facts and circumstances, including but not limited to, full knowledge of each
25 and every violation of Nicole Lees rights and the damages to Nicole Lee
26 proximately caused thereby.
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-2-
1
2
The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under
3 Section 39(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1121, and Sections 1331, 1338(a),
4 1338(b) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338 (a) and (b), and under
5 principles of supplemental jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. 1367(a).
6
10.
Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the Central
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
11.
12 shoes, and accessories. Its signature line of handbags is instantly recognizable and
13 can be found in boutique shops throughout the United States and in foreign cities
14 known for their fashion, such as Paris, Tokyo, Madrid, and Barcelona.
15
12.
13.
Nicole Lee also holds registered and common law trademarks in the
18 Nicole USA logo and other features of its handbags, including its metal emblems
19 and nameplates:
20
21
22
23
14.
For many years, Nicole Lee has been marketing, distributing, offering
24 for sale and selling handbags and related accessories bearing its copyrighted artwork
25 and logos.
26
15.
Nicole Lee has expended substantial time and energy in developing its
27 line into a widely recognized unique brand of handbags with substantial goodwill
28 and a worldwide client base. Nicole Lees handbags have been featured in popular
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-3-
1 and influential fashion magazines, including but not limited to Allure, Lucky,
2 Glamour, Cosmopolitan, O, People and Fashion. They have also been displayed at
3 numerous tradeshows and runway shows, and have been affiliated with the popular
4 television program Dancing With The Stars.
5
6
Registration
Common Name
Marina Design
10
11
Bicycle Design
12
13
Telephone Booth
14
Sandra Design
15
16
Gina Design
17
Suzy Design
18
19
Europe Design
20
Lucia Design
21
17.
22 States Copyright Office on the following dates: (1) Marina DesignSeptember 30,
23 2013; (2) City Look DesignSeptember 13, 2013; (3) Bicycle DesignSeptember
24 13, 2013; (4) Clock Tower DesignMay 23, 2012; (5) Telephone Booth Design
25 May 23, 2013; (6) Sandra DesignSeptember 30, 2013; (7) Shopping Girl
26 DesignDecember 9, 2013; (8) Gina DesignJanuary 15, 2013; (9) Suzy
27 DesignMay 29, 2014; (10) Thoughts of You DesignMay 24, 2012; (11) Europe
28 DesignMay 29, 2014; and (12) Lucia DesignJanuary 15, 2013.
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-4-
18.
19.
21.
18 appearance reflected in such features as the size, shape, color or color combinations,
19 product design, texture, and selection and arrangement of materials and accessories,
20 are distinctive and nonfunctional (the NL Trade Dress).
21
22.
22 (1) An artistic depiction of a stylish woman; and (2) one or more of the other
23 following elements associated with Nicole Lee:
24
25
26
initials and/or the brand name (often printed on the handbag and/or
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-5-
adornment;
g. Beige lining with small graphics and brand name in the following
10
various fonts; and with the images and name highlighted intermittently
11
12
13
23.
14 unusual design that a customer would immediately rely on it to ascertain the source
15 of the product.
16
24.
25.
20 Dress has developed a secondary meaning and significance in the minds of the
21 purchasing public, and the NL Designs, and NL Trade Dress are immediately
22 identified by the public with Nicole Lee.
23
24
Until recently, BLKs handbags sold under the brand name Michael
25 Michelle did not resemble Nicole Lees handbags and they utilized a trademarked
26 laurel wreath logo (MM Laurel Wreath Logo) that bears no resemblance to Nicole
27 Lees trademarked logos:
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-6-
1
2
3
4
27.
5 soliciting orders of its recent collection of handbags, wallets and related accessories.
6 Included in the linesheets were images of BLKs products bearing printed designs
7 that appeared substantially similar to Nicole Lees recent designs, including designs
8 that included the NL Trade Dress.
9
28.
NL Design
13
Infringing Design
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Design)
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-7-
NL Design
Infringing Design
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
29.
MM Laurel Wreath Logo with a new unregistered circular logo, consisting of the
initials MM within the inner circle of a double circle (the MM Circular Logo).
The new unregistered MM Circular Logo is confusingly similar to Nicole Lees
trademarked circular logo:
NL Circular Logo
MM Circular Logo
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
30.
24 Laurel Wreath Logo with the infringing MM Circular Logo only after Defendants
25 began to copy Nicole Lees handbag designs.
26
31.
27 NL Trade Dress has been without Nicole Lees consent, is likely to cause confusion
28 and mistake in the minds of the purchasing public, and has damaged and is
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-8-
1 damaging Nicole Lees valuable intellectual property rights by creating the false
2 impression that Defendants and/or Defendants Infringing Designs are authentic NL
3 Designs, or are authorized, sponsored, or approved by Nicole Lee, when in fact, they
4 are not.
5
32.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
6 Defendants have infringed, are infringing, and unless stopped will continue to
7 infringe the NL Trade Dress by advertising, distributing, selling, and/or offering for
8 sale unauthorized products that unlawfully copy or imitate the unique, distinctive,
9 and non-functional trade dress of the NL Designs.
10
33.
11 out to BLK to discuss BLKs trade dress infringement. Nicole Lee informed BLK
12 that it was actively enforcing its rights in a similar dispute with another
13 manufacturer of handbags and accessories, and demanded that BLK cease and desist
14 its trade dress infringement.
15
34.
Rather than resolve these issues with Nicole Lee, BLK escalated its
16 conduct. In early 2015, BLK circulated new linesheets with its latest collection,
17 which contained handbags, wallets and accessories displaying designs identical to
18 the Marina, Bicycle, and City Look Designs. Specifically, BLKs linesheets
19 depicted handbags bearing copies of three of Nicole Lees copyrighted works,
20 including the (1) Marina Design, (2) City Look Design, and (3) Bicycle Design.
21
35.
22 and the infringing copyrighted works (right) set forth below, it is readily apparent
23 that the elements, composition, arrangement, layout, and appearance of the works of
24 art are virtually identical, strikingly similar, or at a minimum, substantially similar:
25
26
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-9-
1
2
3
NL Copyrighted Artwork
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 Copyright VA 1-879-239 (City Look Design)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
36.
25 model from Nicole Lees City Look Design. As shown below, on at least one
26 handbag, BLK lifted the exact image of one of Nicole Lees female models from the
27 City Look Design:
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-10-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
37.
10 were at the ASD Market Week trade show in Las Vegas and viewed products at
11 BLKs booth, and many of the Michael Michelle handbags on display were virtually
12 identical to Nicole Lees copyrighted artwork and designs.
13
38.
14 instant action to prohibit BLK from further infringing Nicole Lees Marina, City
15 Look and Bicycle Designs. The Parties briefing on the preliminary injunction
16 motion revealed that BLK has infringed at least five additional Nicole Lee
17 copyrighted works. Nicole Lee is informed and believes that BLK obtained these
18 copyrighted images from a third-party vendor that had access to Nicole Lees
19 copyrighted images.
20
39.
From the comparison of Nicole Lees copyrighted works (left) and the
21 infringing copyrighted works (right) set forth below, it is readily apparent that the
22 elements, composition, arrangement, layout, and appearance of the works of art are
23 virtually identical, strikingly similar, or at a minimum, substantially similar:
24
25
26
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-11-
1
2
NL Copyrighted Artwork
Registration VA 1-845-595
3
4
5
6
7
Registration VA 1-919-205
8
9
10
11
12
13
Registration VA 1-816-110
14
15
16
17
Registration VA 1-919-205
18
19
20
21
22
23
Registration VA 1-845-595
24
25
26
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-12-
40.
2 BLK from infringing the Marina, City Look and Bicycle Designs. In August 2015,
3 however, Nicole Lee discovered that BLK is willfully manufacturing, distributing
4 and selling identical copies of Nicole Lees Suzy Design and Thoughts of You
5 Design:
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Copyright VA 1-816-110
(Thoughts of you Design)
PB1504-2 L. COFFEE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-13-
41.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that
2 BLK is also willfully infringing the other designs disclosed in the preliminary
3 injunction briefing: the Gina Design, the Thoughts of You Design, the Europe
4 Design, and the Lucia Design.
5
42.
BLKs handbags and wallets are of an inferior quality to, and sell for
43.
8 the MM Circular Logo in lieu of the Nicole Lee circular logo is intentional,
9 malicious and a willful infringement of Nicole Lees intellectual property rights.
10
44.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
11 without Nicole Lees authorization, Defendants, and each of them, have, are, and
12 will continue to advertise, purchase, sell, manufacture, cause to be manufactured,
13 import and/or distribute their unauthorized products in this judicial district and
14 throughout the United States.
15
45.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
16 Defendants, and each of them, have committed willful and intentional infringement
17 of the NL Trade Dress and NL Copyrighted Artwork with actual or constructive
18 knowledge of Nicole Lees rights and/or in blatant disregard for Nicole Lees rights.
19
46.
20 intellectual property, Defendants have copied Nicole Lees protected copyrights and
21 trade dress and have damaged Nicole Lee in an amount to be proved at trial, but
22 believed to be in excess of $1,000,000.00.
23
24
25
47.
48.
-14-
49.
2 derivative works from, and/or otherwise copied the Marina Design since 2014.
3
50.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
4 Defendants had access to the Marina Design, including without limitation, through
5 (a) Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e-mails;
6 (c) catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the Marina
7 Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples; and (f) handbags
8 being sold in the marketplace bearing the Marina Design.
9
51.
52.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
53.
17 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
18 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
19
54.
20 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
21 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
22
55.
23 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
24 infringement of Nicole Lees Marina Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
25 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
26 infringement of the Marina Design in an amount to be established at trial.
27
56.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
28 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-15-
57.
Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
58.
59.
11 the City Look Design, Copyright No. VA 1-879-483. (See Exhibit B.)
12
60.
13 derivative works from, and/or otherwise copied the City Look Design since 2014.
14
61.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
15 Defendants had access to the City Look Design, including without limitation,
16 through (a) Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e17 mails; (c) catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the
18 City Look Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples; and
19 (f) handbags being sold in the marketplace bearing the City Look Design.
20
62.
63.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
-16-
64.
2 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
3 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
4
65.
5 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
6 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
7
66.
8 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
9 infringement of Nicole Lees City Look Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
10 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
11 infringement of the City Look Design in an amount to be established at trial.
12
67.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
13 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
14 malicious, subjecting Defendants, and each of them, to liability for statutory
15 damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the Copyright Act in the sum of up to one
16 hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per infringement of the City Look Design.
17
68.
Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
20
21
69.
70.
71.
26 derivative works from, and/or otherwise copied the Bicycle Design since 2014.
27
72.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
28 Defendants had access to the Bicycle Design, including without limitation, through
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-17-
1 (a) Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e-mails;
2 (c) catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the
3 Bicycle Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples; and
4 (f) handbags being sold in the marketplace bearing the Bicycle Design.
5
73.
74.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
75.
13 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
14 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
15
76.
16 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
17 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
18
77.
19 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
20 infringement of Nicole Lees Bicycle Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
21 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
22 infringement of the Bicycle Design in an amount to be established at trial.
23
78.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
24 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
25 malicious, subjecting Defendants, and each of them, to liability for statutory
26 damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the Copyright Act in the sum of up to one
27 hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per infringement of the Bicycle Design.
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-18-
79.
Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
80.
Nicole Lee repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in
6 paragraphs 1 through 79 above and 109-163 below as if fully set forth herein.
7
81.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
8 Defendants, and each of them, knowingly induced, participated in, aided and abetted
9 in, and profited from the illegal reproduction and/or subsequent sales of products
10 featuring the infringing copyrighted artwork.
11
82.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
12 Defendants, and each of them, are vicariously liable for the infringement alleged
13 herein because they had the right and ability to supervise the infringing conduct and
14 because they had a direct financial interest in the infringing conduct.
15
83.
16 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
17 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
18
84.
19 infringement, Nicole Lee has suffered and will continue to suffer substantial
20 damages to its business, as well as additional general and special damages, in an
21 amount to be established at trial.
22
85.
23 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
24 infringement of Nicole Lees copyrights. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
25 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to
26 Defendants infringement of Nicole Lees copyrights in an amount to be established
27 at trial.
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-19-
86.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
87.
Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
10
11
88.
89.
14
90.
For many years, Nicole Lee has used the NL Trade Dress in interstate
15 commerce to identify the source of its products, and in particular, the NL Designs,
16 and to distinguish its products from others by prominently displaying the NL Trade
17 Dress in advertising, promotional literature, and on display materials. Through this
18 extended use and association, the NL Trade Dress has acquired a strong consumer
19 awareness and secondary meaning.
20
91.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that
21 commencing at some time unknown to Nicole Lee, and without Nicole Lees
22 consent, Defendants have manufactured, advertised, offered for sale, and have
23 engaged in the sale and distribution of products bearing the NL Trade Dress, and
24 have marketed products confusingly similar to the NL Designs and have profited
25 from their conduct.
26
92.
27 blatant and obvious imitation of the NL Trade Dress. The NL Trade Dress and the
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-20-
93.
Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that the
94.
10 of benefiting from the reputation and good will of Nicole Lee, imitated inter alia the
11 shape, coloring, font, size, style, layout, design, and appearance of the NL Trade
12 Dress elements.
13
95.
14 between the NL Trade Dress and NL Designs, on the one hand; and Defendants
15 products and advertising, on the other hand. As a consequence, Defendants
16 Infringing Designs are likely to deceive and divert customers away from Nicole
17 Lees genuine products.
18
96.
19 Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1125(a)). As a direct and proximate
20 result of the willful and wanton conduct of Defendants, Nicole Lee has been injured
21 and will continue to suffer irreparable injury to its business and reputation unless
22 Defendants are restrained by this Court from infringing the NL Trade Dress.
23
97.
98.
-21-
99.
Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
(Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq., Against All Defendants)
100. Nicole Lee repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in
6 paragraphs 1 through 46, and 88 through 99 above as if fully set forth herein.
7
8 Code 17200, et seq., prohibits any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or
9 practice, and unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising.
10
102. Through Nicole Lees extensive use of its copyrights, trademarks, and
11 designs, its NL Trade Dress has become famous and well-known indicators of the
12 origin and quality of goods sold by Nicole Lee.
13
103. Defendants have used and are using the Infringing Designs in
14 connection with the advertising and selling of goods in an unlawful, unfair and
15 fraudulent manner so as to create a likelihood of confusion among prospective
16 purchasers as to the source of goods, which has damaged, impaired, and diluted the
17 goodwill of Nicole Lee and caused immediate and irreparable damages.
18
27 Nicole Lee and will continue both to damage Nicole Lee and deceive the public
28 until enjoined by this Court. Nicole Lee has no adequate remedy at law.
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-22-
2 revenues and substantial profits arising out of their acts of unfair competition to
3 which they are not entitled, and Nicole Lee has also suffered an injury in fact, and
4 lost money or property as a result of Defendants acts of unfair competition, for
5 which Defendants are responsible.
6
7 entitle Nicole Lee to the remedies available under the UCL, including injunctive
8 relief, restitution, and such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper.
9
10
11
111. On January 15, 2013, Nicole Lee obtained a registered copyright in the
112. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
113. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
19 Defendants had access to the Gina Design, including without limitation, through
20 (a) Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e-mails;
21 (c) catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the Gina
22 Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples; and (f) handbags
23 being sold in the marketplace bearing the Gina Design.
24
115. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
-23-
4 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
5 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
6
7 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
8 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
9
10 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
11 infringement of Nicole Lees Gina Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
12 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
13 infringement of the Gina Design in an amount to be established at trial.
14
119. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
15 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
16 malicious, subjecting Defendants, and each of them, to liability for statutory
17 damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the Copyright Act in the sum of up to one
18 hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per infringement of the Gina Design.
19
120. Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
23
24
122. On May 29, 2014, Nicole Lee obtained a registered copyright in the
-24-
2 derivative works from, and/or otherwise copied the Suzy Design since 2014.
3
124. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
4 Defendants had access to the Suzy Design, including without limitation, through
5 (a) Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e-mails;
6 (c) catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the Suzy
7 Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples; and (f) handbags
8 being sold in the marketplace bearing the Suzy Design.
9
126. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
17 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
18 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
19
20 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
21 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
22
23 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
24 infringement of Nicole Lees Suzy Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
25 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
26 infringement of the Suzy Design in an amount to be established at trial.
27
130. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
28 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-25-
131. Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
133. On May 24, 2012, Nicole Lee obtained a registered copyright in the
134. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
135. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
16 Defendants had access to the Thoughts of You Design, including without limitation,
17 through (a) Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e18 mails; (c) catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the
19 Thoughts of You Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples;
20 and (f) handbags being sold in the marketplace bearing the Thoughts of You Design.
21
137. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
-26-
2 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
3 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
4
5 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
6 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
7
8 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
9 infringement of Nicole Lees Thoughts of You Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled
10 to disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
11 infringement of the Thoughts of You Design in an amount to be established at trial.
12
141. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
13 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
14 malicious, subjecting Defendants, and each of them, to liability for statutory
15 damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the Copyright Act in the sum of up to one
16 hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per infringement of the Thoughts of You
17 Design.
18
142. Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
22
23
144. On May 29, 2014, Nicole Lee obtained a registered copyright in the
-27-
145. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
146. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
5 Defendants had access to the Europe Design, including without limitation, through
6 (a) Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e-mails; (c)
7 catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the Europe
8 Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples; and (f) handbags
9 being sold in the marketplace bearing the Europe Design.
10
148. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
18 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
19 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
20
21 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
22 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
23
24 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
25 infringement of Nicole Lees Europe Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
26 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
27 infringement of the Europe Design in an amount to be established at trial.
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-28-
152. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
2 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
3 malicious, subjecting Defendants, and each of them, to liability for statutory
4 damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the Copyright Act in the sum of up to one
5 hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per infringement of the Europe Design.
6
153. Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
10
155. On January 15, 2013, Nicole Lee obtained a registered copyright in the
156. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
157. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
18 Defendants had access to the Lucia Design, including without limitation, through (a)
19 Nicole Lees retail and online stores; (b) Nicole Lees linesheets and e-mails; (c)
20 catalogues and newspapers; (d) trade shows and fashion shows where the Lucia
21 Design was displayed; (e) Nicole Lees strike-offs and samples; and (f) handbags
22 being sold in the marketplace bearing the Lucia Design.
23
159. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
-29-
4 remedy at law and is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 502(a) and
5 impoundment of infringing goods pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 503(a).
6
7 substantial damages to its business, including having suffered general and special
8 damages, in an amount to be established at trial.
9
10 direct and indirect profits they would not otherwise have realized but for the
11 infringement of Nicole Lees Lucia Design. Nicole Lee is thus entitled to
12 disgorgement of Defendants profits directly and indirectly attributable to the
13 infringement of the Lucia Design in an amount to be established at trial.
14
163. Nicole Lee is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
15 Defendants acts of infringement were, and continue to be, willful, intentional and
16 malicious, subjecting Defendants, and each of them, to liability for statutory
17 damages under Section 504(c)(2) of the Copyright Act in the sum of up to one
18 hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per infringement of the Lucia Design.
19
164. Nicole Lee is also entitled to recover its attorneys fees and costs
21
22
1.
-30-
2.
That Nicole Lee be awarded all damages it has sustained or will sustain
3.
4.
That Nicole Lee be awarded all damages it has sustained or will sustain
13 by reason of Defendants acts of trade dress infringement, that such sums be trebled
14 pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117, and that all infringing goods be impounded and
15 destroyed pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1116(a);
16
5.
That Nicole Lee be awarded all of Defendants profits from its acts and
6.
7.
That Nicole Lee be awarded full and complete restitution, and any
24 other amounts that are recoverable under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq.;
25
8.
9.
-31-
10.
That Nicole Lee be awarded the costs of this action and pre-judgment
11.
That Nicole Lee be awarded any other and further relief as this Court
9
10
11
12
By
/S/
ROBYN C. CROWTHER
Attorneys for Plaintiff Nicole, Inc.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CALDWELL
LESLIE &
PROCTOR
-32-