Herman Miller v. Manhattan Home Design - Complaint

Case 1:20-cv-06172-ALC Document 24 Filed 11/02/20 Page 1 of 66
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
HERMAN MILLER, INC. and Case No. 1:20-cv-6172-ALC

THE ISAMU NOGUCHI FOUNDATION
AND GARDEN MUSEUM, FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT for:
Plaintiffs, (1) COUNTERFEITING
v. (2) DILUTION
MANHATTAN HOME DESIGN LLC, (3) INFRINGEMENT

BARCELONA DESIGNS, and (4) UNFAIR COMPETITION
DANIEL JAVIER LEVY,
Jury Trial Demanded
Defendants.
Plaintiffs Herman Miller, Inc. (“Herman Miller”) and The Isamu Noguchi Foundation and
Garden Museum (“The Noguchi Museum”), by and through their attorneys, file this complaint for
counterfeiting, dilution, infringement, and unfair competition against Defendants Manhattan
Home Design LLC, Barcelona Designs, and Daniel Javier Levy.
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Herman Miller is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
the State of Michigan having a principal place of business at 855 East Main Avenue, Zeeland,
Michigan 49464.
2. Plaintiff The Noguchi Museum is a non-profit New York Education Corporation
having a principal place of business at 32-37 Vernon Boulevard, Long Island City, New York
11106.
3. Defendant Daniel J. Levy is an individual who, upon information and belief, has an
address at 325 West 38th Street, New York, New York 10018.
4829-7290-0048.1
4. Upon information and belief, Manhattan Home Design LLC is a New York
company with its principal place of business at 325 West 38th Street, New York, New York 10018.
Manhattan Home Design operates a website at <<www.manhattanhomedesign.com>>.
5. Upon information and belief, Barcelona Designs is a Canadian entity that purports
to have an address at 4915 Bathurst St. Suite 209, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M2R 1X9. Barcelona
Designs operates a website at <<www.barcelona-designs.com>>.
6. Upon information and belief, Barcelona Designs and Manhattan Home Design are
subject to common ownership and control, including by Daniel J. Levy.
7. Upon information and belief, at most or all times relevant to the claims herein, the
actions of Manhattan Home Design and Barcelona Designs were directed and controlled by
Defendant Levy.
8. Upon information and belief, Manhattan Home Design and Barcelona Designs
were acquired – or were in talks to be acquired – in December 2019 by Kardegian Group, run by
Martin Kardegian.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
9. This is an action for trademark counterfeiting, dilution, and infringement under the
Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125(a), and 1125(c); for design patent infringement under 35
U.S.C. § 271 et seq.; for unfair competition under New York GBL § 349; and for trademark
infringement and unfair competition under the common law.
10. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §
1121(a) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) and (b), and supplemental jurisdiction over the claims
arising under the statutory and common law of the State of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1367(a) because the state law claims are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the
same case or controversy. Furthermore, there is diversity jurisdiction as to the non-federal claims
2
4829-7290-0048.1
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 to the extent the Defendants are diverse relative to Plaintiffs, and
because Plaintiffs’ damages hereunder exceed the statutory threshold.
11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they have already
expressly consented to it.
12. This Court also has personal jurisdiction over Manhattan Home Design and Mr.
Levy because they are located in this District, and because they have marketed and sold infringing
product in this District.
13. This Court also has personal jurisdiction over Barcelona Designs because, upon
information and belief, it is a mere extension of the infringing operations of the other two
defendants, without a genuine or separate corporate existence independent of Mr. Levy and
Manhattan Home Design. Furthermore, upon information and belief, Barcelona Designs has sold
infringing products into this District. To the extent that Barcelona Designs were not otherwise
subject to jurisdiction under any given state long arm statute, this Court would have personal
jurisdiction over Barcelona Designs because of its contacts with the United States market as a
whole.
14. Venue is proper in this District because Defendants have already expressly
consented to it.
15. Venue is also proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (b) and (c). On
information and belief, Defendants have transacted business in this District, and a substantial part
of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this District.
16. Venue is also proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §1400(b) because Defendants
reside in this District and have a regular and established place of business in this District.
3
4829-7290-0048.1
PART I: BACKGROUND
Herman Miller
17. For over a century, Herman Miller has been a leader in the highly competitive
business of designing, manufacturing, distributing, and selling high-quality, design-oriented
furniture.
18. Herman Miller is renowned for its contemporary furniture designs, which have
been deemed works of art and inducted into permanent collections of major museums across the
United States, including the Museum of Modern Art and LACMA in Los Angeles.
19. Herman Miller’s iconic products have generated billions of dollars in sales and are
widely loved by their users.
20. Based in Zeeland, Michigan, Herman Miller manufactures all the furniture designs
asserted herein in the United States pursuant to rigorous quality controls, supporting thousands of
local jobs.
21. For decades, Herman Miller has developed close working relationships with
preeminent designers, who have entrusted their design legacies to Herman Miller to protect for
posterity.
22. It is precisely because Herman Miller has intellectual property rights that it can
protect the work of those designers, and enable designers to produce iconic works that stand the
test of time.
23. Herman Miller has long-established trademark rights in its own name, which is
protected by multiple U.S. registrations. Herein, Herman Miller is asserting infringement of U.S.
Registration Nos. 733,770 and 772,411. Copies of these Trademark Registrations are attached at
Exhibit A.
4
4829-7290-0048.1
Charles and Ray Eames
24. Two of the most notable of Herman Miller’s designers were Charles Eames and his
wife, Ray Eames.
25. The creative genius of Charles and Ray Eames manifested itself in many ways,
including photography, film making, architecture, and, most significantly, furniture design.
26. Charles and Ray Eames became world-famous furniture designers and designed
many of the items that comprise Herman Miller’s furniture line. Through their work, Charles and
Ray Eames became celebrities. Authors have written dozens of books about them. The United
States Library of Congress organized a travelling exhibit of the Eames’ works in 1999.
27. The collaboration between Herman Miller and Charles and Ray Eames is well-
known in the industry and touted heavily in Herman Miller’s marketing.
28. Herman Miller has used the “Eames” name, as well as the name “Charles Eames”
and the name “Ray Eames,” and has created an intentional association with these names as used
in connection with its furniture, since at least 1951.
29. On January 26, 1982, the United States Patent and Trademark Office formally
memorialized the association between the EAMES name and Herman Miller when it issued to
Herman Miller US Trademark Registration No. 1,187,673, for the EAMES® trademark. The
registration provides Herman Miller with the exclusive right to use the EAMES® designation in
connection with the sale of such furniture. A copy of the registration certificate is attached as
Exhibit B.
30. Herman Miller has an industry-wide reputation for manufacturing and marketing
the highest-quality contemporary furniture products, including being the exclusive source in North
America and elsewhere for EAMES® chairs and furniture.
5
4829-7290-0048.1
The EAMES® Aluminum Group Chairs
31. Charles and Ray Eames designed the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs, and
Herman Miller began producing them in 1958. Herman Miller has continuously produced the
chairs since then. An example of one of the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs of the “Thin Pad”
variety is depicted below:
32. In 1969, Charles and Ray Eames added cushions to the EAMES® Aluminum
Group chairs, and Herman Miller has produced them ever since. These chairs are sold as the
EAMES® Soft Pad chairs, and are part of the EAMES® Aluminum Group family. An example
of one of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Soft Pad chairs is depicted below:
6
4829-7290-0048.1
33. Depictions of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad and Soft Pad trade dresses
are attached hereto as Exhibit C.
34. Among both the Soft Pad and Thin Pad chairs, Herman Miller has sold variations
with and without the distinctive parallelogram armrests (discussed further below), as well as
variations with taller backrests (the Executive Chair version), and some with alternative fabrics,
each of which has achieved great recognition in its own right and as part of a family of related
EAMES® designs. Exhibit C illustrates these variations.
35. While some of these variants have been sold in greater quantity and for a longer
period of time than others, each of these designs is well-known, indeed famous, as a Herman Miller
original product design, all of which are associated with one another and with Herman Miller.
36. Herman Miller possesses trade dress rights in all of these designs, as well as
registered trade dress rights in the distinctive frame with armrests.
37. The distinctive overall look of the EAMES® Aluminum Group design carries over
through all the chairs – reinforced among all of them as a family of designs – and consumers can
7
4829-7290-0048.1
easily recognize them as mere variants of each other, just the same as consumers would recognize
different model variants of the same car.
38. Trade dress is simply the overall visual impression of what consumers see.
However, set forth below are the most salient and dominant design features that distinguish the
trade dress of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad and Soft Pad trade dresses.
39. A dominant distinguishing feature of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad
and Soft Pad trade dress is the appearance of a single, slender rectangular slab of roughly uniform
thickness, that is substantially flat across its width, and that has been curved into a rounded L-
shape and suspended between two side rails, in the manner and style of the EAMES® Aluminum
Group chairs.
40. A further distinguishing feature of Herman Miller’s Thin Pad trade dress appearing
on many but not all of the chairs is the use of a web or chair surface with multiple narrow
rectangular tufts.
41. Yet another distinguishing feature of Herman Miller’s EAMES® Aluminum Group
trade dress appearing on many but not all of the chairs is the use of parallelogram-shaped armrests,
with a thin and substantially uniform cross-section. Although customers can also buy versions of
the chairs without armrests, the armrests have historically been sold on a significant number of the
chairs, and hence became a prominent distinguishing feature.
chairs is the use of “scroll” edges of the seat and backrest.
chairs is the specific cross-bar design across the back of the upper backrest.
8
4829-7290-0048.1
chairs is a pair of visible parallel L-shaped side rails running along substantially the full length of
the backrest and seat.
45. Another distinguishing feature of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Soft Pad trade
dress is the use of 2-3 uniformly shaped rectangular backrest cushions and a single seat cushion.
46. The most visually dominant features of the trade dress as outlined above were
articulated by Herman Miller recently in Blumenthal Distributing, Inc. v Herman Miller, Inc., C.D.
Cal. Case No. 5:14-cv-01926-JAK (“Blumenthal Case”), wherein the District Court formally
adopted those articulations in a ruling at Dkt. 192 of that case. The articulations in the Blumenthal
Case not only identified the most dominant visual features of the trade dress, but also explained
how infringers might combine and/or vary those features to create an infringing design that mimics
the overall appearance of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad and Soft Pad designs.
47. Since introducing the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs in 1958, Herman Miller
has invested millions of dollars in promoting the full family of EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs.
48. The fact that Herman Miller now sells the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad
and Soft Pad chairs as part of a family of related designs reinforces the strength of the trade dress,
as consumers understand the chairs to all be variations of the same design concept. The strength
and fame of any one design inures to the benefit of all of them, the same way that a convertible
version of a popular car builds upon the fame of the original hardtop version.
49. The trade dress of the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs is unique, distinctive, and
non-functional, and it is not necessary for others to use this trade dress to compete in the
marketplace. The design of the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs is based on a general concept
of suspending a web of seating upholstery between two rails, but there are an infinite variety of
9
4829-7290-0048.1
aesthetic design configurations that could be based on that core utilitarian concept, and the Eames
couple chose the particular design of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad and Soft Pad chairs
because of their aesthetic appeal and distinctiveness.
50. The unique and distinctive look of the trade dress of the EAMES® Aluminum
Group chairs identifies and distinguishes them from competitors’ chairs.
51. The consuming public and the commercial trade have come to recognize and
associate the trade dress of the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs with Herman Miller as a result
of the extensive and continuous promotion and sales of chairs over the past fifty years.
52. Herman Miller has sold hundreds of thousands of EAMES® Aluminum Group
chairs, and because they are often used for communal seating (such as in conference rooms) any
given chair may have been enjoyed by thousands of users over its lifetime.
53. The EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs have also been inducted into many art
museums, including the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.
54. The EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs are also featured ubiquitously in American
media, particularly in movies and television. In the past several years, the EAMES® Aluminum
Group chairs (as well as the EAMES® Lounge Chair) have become practically synonymous with
the term “mid-century modern.” The recent resurgence in popularity of mid-century modern
design – driven in part by the cultural effect of the popular television show “Mad Men” – created
a surge of renewed interest in the EAMES® Lounge Chairs and EAMES® Aluminum Group
chairs. That wave of renewed interest has also encouraged blatant infringement of the kind
complained of in this civil action.
55. Over the years, Herman Miller has pursued and shut down numerous infringing
sales operations. A recent example of this is the Blumenthal Case, in which a Final Judgment of
10
4829-7290-0048.1
infringement and dilution was entered with respect to copies of the EAMES® Aluminum Group
chairs following a jury trial.
56. EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs are recognized as “iconic” in the marketplace.
57. Herman Miller deliberately does not license the EAMES® Aluminum Group
designs, and maintains strict control over their manufacture and sale to preserve the Eames design
legacy in perpetuity.
58. With respect to Herman Miler’s trade dress rights, it is not necessary that consumers
know the name of a product, or that the name of the brand owner is Herman Miller. Rather,
relevant consumers need only have a belief that the design is distinctive and originates from a
single source.
59. As a result of Herman Miller’s efforts, and unsolicited media attention, the trade
dress of the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs has acquired appreciable secondary meaning, and
is indeed a famous design mark, which identifies and distinguishes the chairs from chairs offered
by competitors.
60. The United States Patent and Trademark Office recognized Herman Miller’s
exclusive, proprietary rights in the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs on June 20, 2006 when it
issued to Herman Miller US TM Registration No. 3,105,591, covering the shape of the frame
common to many of the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad and Soft Pad chairs, as depicted
below:
11
4829-7290-0048.1
61. US TM Registration No. 3,105,591 is now incontestable. The registration provides
Herman Miller with the exclusive right to use the design of the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs
in connection with furniture. A copy of the registration certificate is attached as Exhibit D.
62. Registration of the EAMES® Aluminum Group trade dress confirms that Herman
Miller owns the exclusive right to market and sell products bearing this design or any other design
that is sufficiently similar thereto as to be likely to cause confusion, regardless of possible
differences.
63. As reflected by the registration, the claimed chair frame itself is sufficiently
recognizable to consumers so as to be trade dress in its own right, separate and apart from the rest
of the chair, much like a car’s front grill shape can be protectable in its own right separate from
the rest of the car.
64. As with all of Herman Miller’s trade dress registrations, registration of the
EAMES® Aluminum Group trade dress gives notice to the world that this design belongs
exclusively to Herman Miller.
12
4829-7290-0048.1
65. Registration of the EAMES® Aluminum Group trade dress confirms as well that
the design possesses secondary meaning, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the
burden to prove otherwise.
66. Registration of the EAMES® Aluminum Group trade dress confirms as well that
the design is not functional, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the burden to prove
otherwise.
67. As a result of Herman Miller’s efforts, and unsolicited media attention, the
registered EAMES® Aluminum Group trade dress has developed appreciable secondary meaning
and fame as an indicator that Herman Miller is the source of goods.
68. Herman Miller’s registered and unregistered trade dress for the EAMES®
Aluminum Group chairs represents highly valuable goodwill owned by Herman Miller.
69. In addition to the trade dress, Herman Miller owns unregistered trademark rights in
the name ALUMINUM GROUP, which it uses to market its EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs.
The ALUMINUM GROUP mark has been used by Herman Miller consistently in promotion and
sale of the EAMES® Aluminum Group line, and has become a well-known identifier of source
for all the same reasons as the trade dress.
70. Furthermore, Herman Miller owns unregistered trademark rights in the names of
particular EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs. Rather than use model number designations,
Herman Miller made a deliberate choice to call its individual chairs by name. This includes the
EAMES® Aluminum Group Management Chair (which is the version of the chair with armrests
and a medium height backrest), the EAMES® Aluminum Group Executive Chair (which is the
version of the chair with armrests and a tall backrest), the EAMES® Aluminum Group Thin Pad
(which refers to the chairs with the thinner tufted upholstery), and the EAMES® Aluminum Group
13
4829-7290-0048.1
Soft Pad (which refers to the chairs with the thicker cushions). The ALUMINUM GROUP
MANAGEMENT CHAIR mark, the ALUMINUM GROUP EXECUTIVE CHAIR mark, the
SOFT PAD mark, and the THIN PAD mark, have been used by Herman Miller consistently in
promotion and sale of the EAMES® Aluminum Group line, and have become well-known
identifiers of source for all the same reasons as the trade dress.
The EAMES® Lounge Chair and Ottoman
71. Charles and Ray Eames designed the EAMES® Lounge Chair in the early 1950s.
Herman Miller began producing the product in 1956 and has continuously produced the chairs
since then.
72. An example of the EAMES® Lounge chair (with accompanying ottoman) is
depicted below:
73. Further depictions of the asserted EAMES® Lounge Chair trade dress are attached
hereto as Exhibit E.
14
4829-7290-0048.1
74. The trade dress of the EAMES® Lounge Chairs is simply the overall visual
appearance of the chairs as seen by consumers.
75. Although the trade dress of the EAMES® Lounge Chair is simply the overall visual
appearance of the chairs, dominant distinguishing features as seen by consumers include the
unique curvatures of both the seat and back portions (including the molded shells of the back and
base of the chair with U-shaped cross-sections); the two-part backrest design, including upper and
lower back panels connected by vertical supports; the deeply indented “twin-button” tufting
pattern on matching cushions, including on the Ottoman; and the sweeping integration of the
armrests into the base of the chair, incluidng how they curve outward from their connection to the
seat base. Pairing the char with its matching Ottomon (which bears the same twin-button tufting
as the seat and U-shaped shell cross-section) only further emphasizes the association of the chair
with Herman Miller because of how frequently the pair are sold together.
76. The trade dress of the EAMES® Lounge Chair is unique, distinctive, and non-
functional, and it is not necessary for others to use this trade dress to compete in the marketplace.
Indeed, there are many other plywood and leather lounge chairs on the market that provide
equivalent functionalities while having a distinctly different aesthetic.
77. The unique and distinctive look of the trade dress of the EAMES® Lounge Chair
identifies and distinguishes them from competitors’ chairs.
associate the trade dress of the EAMES® Lounge Chair with Herman Miller as a result of the
extensive and continuous promotion and sales of chairs over the past fifty years.
15
4829-7290-0048.1
79. Hundreds of thousands of EAMES® Lounge Chairs have been sold. EAMES®
Lounge Chairs are often kept as living room or office furniture, and as such are seen and enjoyed
by countless more individuals than just their owners.
80. The EAMES® Lounge Chair design has also been inducted into many art museums,
including the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.
81. The EAMES® Lounge Chairs are also featured ubiquitously in American media,
particularly in movies and television. In the past several years, EAMES® Lounge Chairs (as well
as the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs) have become practically synonymous with the term
“mid-century modern.” The recent resurgence in popularity of mid-century modern design –
driven in part by the cultural effect of the popular television show “Mad Men” – created a surge
of renewed interest in the EAMES® Lounge Chairs and EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs. That
wave of renewed interest has also encouraged blatant infringement of the kind complained of in
this civil action.
82. Over the years, Herman Miller has pursued and shut down many infringing sales
operations.
83. EAMES® Lounge Chairs are recognized as “iconic” in the marketplace.
84. Herman Miller deliberately does not license the EAMES® Lounge Chair or
Ottoman designs, and maintains strict control over their manufacture and sale to preserve the
Eames design legacy in perpetuity.
85. With respect to Herman Miler’s trade dress rights, it is not necessary that consumers
know the name of a product, or that the name of the brand owner is Herman Miller. Rather,
relevant consumers need only have a belief that the design is distinctive and originates from a
single source.
16
4829-7290-0048.1
86. As a result of Herman Miller’s efforts, and unsolicited media attention, the trade
dress of the EAMES® Lounge Chair has acquired appreciable secondary meaning, and is indeed
a famous design mark, which identifies and distinguishes the chairs from chairs offered by
competitors.
87. The United States Patent and Trademark Office recognized Herman Miller’s
exclusive, proprietary rights to the EAMES® Lounge Chair on May 20, 2003 when it issued to
Herman Miller US TM Registration No. 2,716,843 covering the shape of EAMES® Lounge Chair
(without an ottoman), as depicted below:
88. US TM Registration No. 2,716,843 is now incontestable. The registration provides
Herman Miller with the exclusive right to use the design of the EAMES® Lounge Chair chairs in
connection with furniture. A copy of the registration certificate is attached as Exhibit F.
89. The United States Patent and Trademark Office also has granted Herman Miller
Registration No. 5,767,140 in the design of the EAMES® Lounge Chair Ottoman, as depicted
below. A copy of the registration certificate is attached as Exhibit F.
17
4829-7290-0048.1
90. As with all of Herman Miller’s trade dress registrations, registration of the
EAMES® Lounge Chair trade dress (both the chair and ottoman) gives notice to the world that
these design belongs exclusively to Herman Miller.
91. Registration of the EAMES® Lounge Chair trade dress confirms as well that the
designs possesses secondary meaning, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the
burden to prove otherwise.
92. Registration of the EAMES® Lounge Chair trade dress confirms as well that the
designs are not functional, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the burden to prove
otherwise.
93. As a result of Herman Miller’s efforts, and unsolicited media attention, the
registered EAMES® Lounge Chair and Ottoman trade dress has developed appreciable secondary
meaning and fame as an indicator that Herman Miller is the source of goods.
94. Herman Miller’s registered and unregistered trade dress for both the EAMES®
Lounge Chair and the Ottoman represents highly valuable goodwill owned by Herman Miller.
95. Herman Miller also owns unregistered trademark rights in the name EAMES
LOUNGE CHAIR as well as EAMES LOUNGE CHAIR AND OTTOMAN, which it has used
consistently for decades to identify the chairs in commerce, and which are well-known for all the
same reasons that the trade dress is well-known.
18
4829-7290-0048.1
The Nelson Bench
96. Another prominent and highly regarded designer with whom Herman Miller
worked closely for over twenty-five years was George Nelson. His designs are displayed in the
permanent collections of the Museum of Modern Art, New York, Museum of Modern Art, San
Francisco, Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum, New York, Brooklyn Museum of Art,
and Philadelphia Museum of Art, among others, and in 1991 he received a Lifetime Achievement
Award from the American Institute of Graphic Arts
97. George Nelson designed the Nelson Bench, and Herman Miller has continuously
produced, promoted and sold the seating since 1994. An example of the Nelson Bench is depicted
below. Further examples can be found at www.hermanmiller.com.
98. Since introducing the Nelson Bench in 1994, Herman Miller has achieved
considerable success selling the seating design, and Herman Miller has invested substantial sums
marketing the product. The Nelson Bench has won design awards, and is widely known in the
marketplace.
99. The Nelson Bench trade dress is unique, distinctive, and non-functional, and it is
not necessary for others to use this trade dress to compete in the marketplace. The unique and
19
4829-7290-0048.1
distinctive look of the Nelson Bench trade dress identifies and distinguishes the Nelson Bench
from competitors' seating products.
100. As with any trade dress, the Nelson Bench trade dress is its overall visual
appearance.
101. Although the Nelson Bench trade dress is simply its overall visual appearance,
among the dominant visual features that are most distinctive of the registered Nelson Bench trade
dress (registration discussed and depicted below) are a long, flat rectangular bench surface having
uniformly closely-spaced longitudinal slats, and supported at opposite ends by wide flat slats
formed into upside-down trapezoids that serve as legs.
associate the Nelson Bench trade dress with Herman Miller as a result of the extensive and
continuous promotion and sales of the Nelson Bench over the past twenty-five years. As a result
of these efforts, the Nelson Bench trade dress has acquired appreciable secondary meaning, which
identifies and distinguishes the Nelson Bench from seating products offered by competitors.
103. The United States Patent and Trademark Office recognized Herman Miller's
exclusive, proprietary rights to the Nelson Bench on February 12, 2019, when it issued to Herman
Miller US TM Registration No. 5,672,151 covering the shape of Nelson Bench, as depicted below:
20
4829-7290-0048.1
104. US TM Registration No. 5,672,151 provides Herman Miller with the exclusive
right to use the design of the Nelson Bench in connection with furniture. A copy of the registration
certificate is attached as Exhibit G.
105. As a result of such extensive and exclusive use and promotion of the trade dress
embodied in the Nelson Bench, the trade dress has developed appreciable secondary meaning as
an indicator that Herman Miller is the source of goods.
106. Herman Miller's trade dress for the Nelson Bench represents highly valuable
goodwill owned by Herman Miller.
107. Registration of the Nelson Bench trade dress confirms that Herman Miller owns the
exclusive right to market and sell products bearing this design or any other design that is
sufficiently similar thereto as to be likely to cause confusion, regardless of possible differences.
108. As with all of Herman Miller's trade dress registrations, registration of the Nelson
Bench trade dress gives notice to the world that this design belongs exclusively to Herman Miller.
109. Registration of the Nelson Bench trade dress confirms as well that the design
possesses secondary meaning, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the burden to
prove otherwise.
110. Registration of the Nelson Bench trade dress confirms as well that the design is not
functional, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the burden to prove otherwise.
111. Herman Miller also has exclusive rights to use the name NELSON BENCH to
market and sell the Nelson Bench in the United States.
The Sayl Chair
112. Designed by Yves Béhar and introduced in 2011, the Sayl chair has a unique visual
appearance that quickly made it stand out in the market. Example images are shown below.
21
4829-7290-0048.1
Further examples can be found at www.hermanmiller.com.
22
4829-7290-0048.1
113. Since introducing the Sayl chair, Herman Miller has achieved considerable success
selling the seating design, and Herman Miller has invested substantial sums marketing the product.
The Sayl chair is widely known in the marketplace.
114. The Sayl Chair’s trade dress is unique, distinctive, and non-functional, and it is not
necessary for others to use this trade dress to compete in the marketplace. The unique and
distinctive look of the Sayl Chair trade dress identifies and distinguishes the Sayl Chair from
competitors' seating products.
115. As with any trade dress, the Sayl Chair trade dress is its overall visual appearance.
116. Although the Sayl Chair’s trade dress is simply its overall visual appearance, a
dominant visual feature that is distinctive and identifying is its uniquely-shaped rimless backrest
that mimics the appearance of a mainsail, and is narrower at the top and gradually widens. In the
case of those Sayl chairs that have a “netting design” backrest that appears to hang down from the
rear support (as shown in the pictures above), this too – in conjunction with the unique profile of
the backrest – further distinguishes the design, and is strongly associated with the Sayl brand.
associate the Sayl trade dress with Herman Miller as a result of the extensive and continuous
promotion and sales of the Sayl Chair over the past decade. As a result of these efforts, the Sayl
Chair trade dress has acquired appreciable secondary meaning, which identifies and distinguishes
the Sayl Chair from seating products offered by competitors.
exclusive, proprietary rights to the Sayl Chair by granting Herman Miller U.S. Trademark
Registration No. 5,332,550 for its design, as shown below:
23
4829-7290-0048.1
right to use the design of the Sayl chair in connection with furniture. A copy of the registration
certificate is attached as Exhibit H.
embodied in the Sayl Chair, the trade dress has developed appreciable secondary meaning as an
indicator that Herman Miller is the source of goods.
121. Herman Miller's trade dress for the Sayl Chair represents highly valuable goodwill
owned by Herman Miller.
122. Registration of the Sayl Chair trade dress confirms that Herman Miller owns the
24
4829-7290-0048.1
123. As with all of Herman Miller's trade dress registrations, registration of the Sayl
Chair trade dress gives notice to the world that this design belongs exclusively to Herman Miller.
124. Registration of the Sayl Chair trade dress confirms as well that the design possesses
secondary meaning, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the burden to prove
otherwise.
125. Registration of the Sayl Chair trade dress confirms as well that the design is not
The Setu Chair
126. Designed by Herman Miller collaborator Studio 7.5 and introduced in 2009, the
Setu chair has a unique visual appearance that identifies it as a brand. Example images are shown
below. Further examples can be found at www.hermanmiller.com.
25
4829-7290-0048.1
127. Since introducing the Setu chair, Herman Miller has achieved considerable success
selling the seating design, and Herman Miller has invested substantial sums marketing the product.
The Setu chair is widely known in the marketplace.
128. The Setu Chair’s trade dress is unique, distinctive, and non-functional, and it is not
necessary for others to use this trade dress to compete in the marketplace. The unique and
distinctive look of the Setu Chair trade dress identifies and distinguishes the Setu Chair from
competitors' seating products.
129. As with any trade dress, the Setu Chair trade dress is its overall visual appearance.
130. Although the Setu Chair’s trade dress is simply its overall visual appearance, the
dominant visual features that are distinctive and identifying are the thin, ribbon-like armrests
curved into a stylized parallelogram shape with respect to the seat pocket, which ribbon-like forms
are carried through the back of the chair; and paired with a thin one-piece sweeping seat and
backrest, the supports for which form a scroll-like appearance, with the backrest and seat portion
supported on either side by pairs of separated spines of the form and stylization shown in the
pictures above.
associate the Setu trade dress with Herman Miller as a result of the extensive and continuous
promotion and sales of the Setu Chair over the past decade. As a result of these efforts, the Setu
Chair trade dress has acquired appreciable secondary meaning, which identifies and distinguishes
the Setu Chair from seating products offered by competitors.
exclusive, proprietary rights to the Setu Chair by granting Herman Miller U.S. Trademark
Registration No. 5,174,864 for its design, as shown below:
26
4829-7290-0048.1
right to use the design of the Setu chair in connection with furniture. A copy of the registration
certificate is attached as Exhibit I.
embodied in the Setu Chair, the trade dress has developed appreciable secondary meaning as an
indicator that Herman Miller is the source of goods.
135. The Setu chair has also been the subject of extensive unsolicited media attention,
including appearances in major movies and television shows.
136. Herman Miller's trade dress for the Setu Chair represents highly valuable goodwill
owned by Herman Miller.
137. Registration of the Setu Chair trade dress confirms that Herman Miller owns the
27
4829-7290-0048.1
138. As with all of Herman Miller's trade dress registrations, registration of the Setu
Chair trade dress gives notice to the world that this design belongs exclusively to Herman Miller.
139. Registration of the Setu Chair trade dress confirms as well that the design possesses
secondary meaning, shifting to anyone wishing to challenge the design the burden to prove
otherwise.
140. Registration of the Setu Chair trade dress confirms as well that the design is not
141. In addition to its trade dress registration, Herman Miller has also obtained several
design patents covering the unique ornamental appearance of the Setu Chair. Example images
from U.S. Design Patent Nos. D659,417, D628,831, and D591,986 (“Setu Design Patents”) as
shown below. Copies of the Setu Design Patents are attached within Exhibit J.
28
4829-7290-0048.1
142. Herman Miller owns all right and title in the Setu Design Patents.
143. Herman Miller has marked its Setu Chairs in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 287.
The Noguchi Museum and the NOGUCHI® Table
144. Famed Japanese-American sculptor Isamu Noguchi was a contemporary of Charles
and Ray Eames, and collaborated with Herman Miller on many well-known designs.
145. The Noguchi Museum is a non-profit organization that has been devoted to the
preservation of Isamu Noguchi’s design legacy since the 1980s. It operates a physical museum in
Long Island City, New York, and also owns and licenses the intellectual property rights associated
with Isamu Noguchi’s celebrated works.
146. The NOGUCHI® Table was introduced in 1948 and has been sold by Herman
Miller since that time, becoming an icon of modern furniture.
147. A depiction of the NOGUCHI® Table is shown below. Further examples can be
found at www.hermanmiller.com.
29
4829-7290-0048.1
148. The NOGUCHI® Table is protected by U.S. Trademark Registration No.
2,648,166, an image from which is shown below. A copy of the Registration is attached as Exhibit
K.
149. Registration No. 2,648,166 is now incontestable.
30
4829-7290-0048.1
150. The Noguchi Museum owns the rights to the design of the NOGUCHI® Table,
which it licenses exclusively to Herman Miller for the manufacture, marketing, and sale of the
NOGUCHI® Table.
151. The Noguchi Museum is also the owner of US Trademark Registrations No.
2,810,235 for the word mark NOGUCHI, which it licenses exclusively to Herman Miller for use
in connection with the NOGUCHI® Table.
152. The trade dress of the NOGUCHI® Table is simply its overall visual appearance to
consumers.
153. Although the trade dress is the overall visual appearance, the most salient
distinguishing design elements of the NOGUCHI® Table are its distinctive rounded triangular
glass tabletop, and its uniquely shaped interlocking twin support legs.
154. The trade dress of the NOGUCHI® Table is unique, distinctive, and non-
functional, and it is not necessary for others to use this trade dress to compete in the marketplace.
The NOGUCHI® Table design is intentionally aesthetic and abstract, and was even recently
recognized as such in an entirely unsolicited commentary by a federal District Court Judge in the
case of Inhale, Inc. v. Starbuzz Tobacco, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2017).
155. The unique and distinctive look of the trade dress of the NOGUCHI® Table
identifies and distinguishes it from competitors’ products.
156. The consuming public and the commercial trade have come to recognize the
distinctive trade dress of the NOGUCHI® Table as a result of the extensive and continuous
promotion and sales of the tables over the past fifty years.
157. NOGUCHI® Tables are often kept as living room or office furniture, and as such
are seen and enjoyed by countless more individuals than just their owners.
31
4829-7290-0048.1
158. The NOGUCHI® Table has also been inducted into many art museums, including
the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.
159. The NOGUCHI® Table is also featured ubiquitously in American media,
particularly in movies and television.
160. The NOGUCHI® Table is recognized as “iconic” in the marketplace.
161. As a result of the foregoing, and unsolicited media attention and other efforts, the
trade dress of the NOGUCHI® Table has acquired appreciable secondary meaning, and is indeed
a famous design mark, which identifies and distinguishes the tables from furniture offered by
competitors.
162. The unregistered trade dress for the NOGUCHI® Table has come to represent
highly valuable goodwill.
163. With respect to the trade dress rights, it is not necessary that consumers know the
name of a product, or that the name of the manufacturer is Herman Miller. Rather, relevant
consumers need only have a belief that the design is distinctive and originates from a single source.
164. The registered NOGUCHI® trademark represents significant goodwill and is well-
known in the relevant market.
32
4829-7290-0048.1
PART II: DEFENDANTS’ WRONGFUL CONDUCT
165. The website <<www.ManhattanHomeDesign.com>> is home to the brand
“Manhattan Home Design,” an E-commerce furniture company.
166. Upon information and belief, Manhattan Home Design Furniture was created by
and has been closely managed by Defendant Daniel J. Levy in New York.
167. The website <<www.Barcelona-Designs.com>> is home to the brand “Barcelona
Designs,” an E-commerce furniture company.
168. Upon information and belief, Barcelona Designs was created by and has been
closely managed by Defendant Daniel J. Levy in New York, and was created to avoid the
appearance of infringement in the United States by purporting to funnel product through Canada.
169. Upon information and belief, Mr. Levy and Manhattan Home Design LLC are
closely tied to the website <<www.Barcelona-Design.com>>, which, while purporting to be run
as a Toronto, Canada-based company, is actually operated from New York, and directly references
Manhattan Home Design on its website.
170. Defendants have been engaged in rampant infringement and dilution of Herman
Miller’s valuable trade dress and trademark rights.
171. In violation of Herman Miller’s registered and unregistered trade dress rights in the
Eames Aluminum Group Chair line, Defendants have marketed and sold what it calls its “Eames
Office Chair Soft Pad Management Chair,” its “Eames Office Chair Ribbed Management Chair,”
and its “Eames Office Chair Soft Pad Executive Chair,” which are counterfeit copies of the
EAMES® Soft Pad Management Chair, the EAMES® Thin Pad Management Chair, and the
EAMES® Soft Pad Executive Chair, respectively. Some example images of these counterfeits are
shown below.
33
4829-7290-0048.1
34
4829-7290-0048.1
172. Defendants have also marketed and sold several additional copies of the EAMES®
Aluminum Group chairs under the names “Eames Style Chair,” “EM Office Chair,” and “Engineer
Office Chair,” and “Twist Office Chair.” Example images of these are shown below.
35
4829-7290-0048.1
36
4829-7290-0048.1
37
4829-7290-0048.1
173. In addition to infringing upon Herman Miller’s trade dress rights, Defendants have
infringed upon Herman Miller’s registered trademark rights in the name EAMES®, as well
unregistered rights in the trade names ALUMINUM GROUP and SOFT PAD.
174. The same counterfeit and infringing chairs are sold through Barcelona Designs, as
shown below. The EAMES® name is used in the webpage metadata, and displays in the browser
tab, as also shown below.
38
4829-7290-0048.1
39
4829-7290-0048.1
175. With respect to the EAMES® Lounge Chair and Ottoman, Manhattan Home
Design has marketed and sold counterfeit copies of both pieces under the name “Classic Lounge
40
4829-7290-0048.1
Chair & Ottoman,” while also using the trademarked EAMES® name elsewhere on the website
and in internet advertising in connection with the chair. Example images of these are shown below.
176. Although, on information and belief, Defendants’ chairs are all manufactured in
China, Defendants have also advertised falsely that their copies of the EAMES® Lounge Chair
and Ottoman use only “FAS American timber.”
177. Counterfeit copies of the EAMES® Lounge Chair and Ottoman are also sold
through Barcelona Designs, as shown below. Although the text on the website avoids using the
name EAMES®, it is used in the underlying metadata of the webpage, and is visible in the browser
tab.
41
4829-7290-0048.1
178. In violation of Herman Miller’s registered trade dress rights in the Nelson Bench,
Manhattan Home Design has counterfeit copies under the name “Nelson Bench.” An example
image is shown below.
179. Barcelona Designs sells the same counterfeits under the name “Sauna.”
42
4829-7290-0048.1
180. In violation of Herman Miller’s trade dress rights in the Sayl Chair, Defendants
have sold a confusingly similar chair called the Santer Chair, as shown below.
181. In violation of Herman Miller’s trade dress rights in the Setu Chair, and the Setu
Design Patents, Defendants have sold a confusingly similar chair called the Salam Chair, as shown
below:
43
4829-7290-0048.1
182. In violation of The Noguchi Museum’s trade dress and trademark rights (as
exclusively licensed to Herman Miller), Manhattan Home Design and Daniel Levy have sold
counterfeit copies of the NOGUCHI® Table using the name “Noguchi,” as shown below.
183. Barcelona Designs has also sold counterfeit copies of the Noguchi Table, but under
a different name, as shown below.
44
4829-7290-0048.1
184. The fact that Defendants have copied so many different designs sold by Herman
Miller and featured them as their primary products lends to an aura that Defendants are somehow
affiliated with or authorized by Herman Miller, when in fact the opposite is true. In this manner,
the accused products build upon each other and have a cumulative effect of causing consumer
confusion that is greater than if any one of them had been sold alone.
185. Plaintiffs do not yet know the exact nature of the connection between Manhattan
Home Design and Barcelona Designs, but on information and belief, both were created and have
been operated by Mr. Levy personally from his address at 325 West 38th Street, New York, New
York 10018, and Barcelona Designs is not separately incorporated..
186. In addition to selling infringing and counterfeit copies of Herman Miller’s and The
Noguchi Museum’s products, Defendants have also improperly and extensively used Herman
Miller and Noguchi Museum trademarks in online advertising. For example, below are several
Google search results. It is evident that Defendants have also purchased advertising keywords
that, although not visible to consumers, redirect internet traffic to their infringing websites in an
infringing manner.
45
4829-7290-0048.1
46
4829-7290-0048.1
47
4829-7290-0048.1
48
4829-7290-0048.1
187. Defendants’ conduct is likely to cause not only point of sale confusion, but also
initial interest confusion from customers who are improperly diverted to Defendants, and also post-
sale confusion from consumers who see Defendants’ products in use after they have been
purchased.
188. After Herman Miller discovered Manhattan Home Design, it repeatedly placed the
entity and Mr. Levy on notice of the infringements, and executed numerous takedowns of
infringing content.
189. As recently as September 13, 2019, in response to a September 3, 2019 cease and
desist letter from Herman Miller, Manhattan Home Design conceded that it was removing all
accused items. However, notwithstanding these assurances, Manhattan Home Design has
continued thereafter to violate Herman Miller’s intellectual property rights.
190. Upon information and belief, in an effort to evade trademark enforcement efforts
and conceal their ongoing infringing conduct, Defendants have attempted to block Herman
Miller’s access to the portions of their websites displaying infringing content. For example, upon
information and belief, when the website detects that a user with a Herman Miller IP address is
visiting the site, it has redirected infringing webpages to a page stating “This product is no longer
available” (as shown below). This is willful, deceptive and misleading conduct evidencing that
Defendants are aware that their actions are unlawful.
49
4829-7290-0048.1
50
4829-7290-0048.1
COUNT I
COUNTERFEITING OF HERMAN MILLER REGISTRATIONS
UNDER 15 U.S.C. §1114
191. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference.
192. Herman Miller asserts this claim of trademark and trade dress counterfeiting
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1114 based upon the intentional copying of (a) Herman Miller’s registered
EAMES® Aluminum Group design, (b) Herman Miller’s registered EAMES® Lounge Chair and
Ottoman designs, (c) Herman Miller’s EAMES® trademark, and (d) Herman Miller’s registered
Nelson Bench design (collectively, the “Registrations”).
193. Herman Miller has valid and protectable rights in its Registrations.
194. Defendants have marketed and sold products that are substantially
indistinguishable from Herman Miller’s registered designs.
195. Defendants have also sold the counterfeit chairs under the name EAMES®.
196. Defendants have no license from Herman Miller to engage in the promotion or sale
of Herman Miller’s designs, or the use of their trademarks.
197. Defendants’ counterfeiting is likely to cause point-of-sale confusion, initial interest
confusion, and post-sale confusion, resulting in lost sales to Herman Miller, diminution in brand
value, and other harms that set forth herein.
198. Defendants’ counterfeiting also dilutes Herman Miller’s registered design rights.
199. Defendants’ counterfeiting has been deliberate and willful.
200. Herman Miller is entitled to an injunction to stop the irreparable injuries caused by
the counterfeiting complained of herein.
201. Herman Miller is entitled to elect either trebled actual damages plus attorneys’ fees
under 15 U.S.C. §1117(b), or statutory damages under 15 U.S.C. §1117(c).
51
4829-7290-0048.1
202. Allowable statutory damages in this case for willful counterfeiting are up to
$2,000,000 per registration.
203. Mr. Levy bears individual and joint liability for this claim because, upon
information and belief, he personally directed and controlled the acts complained of herein.
204. Alternatively, Mr. Levy bears alter ego liability because he has used the corporate
form as a sham to conduct a fraudulent operation, and there is otherwise no cognizable distinction
between Mr. Levy and Manhattan Home Design or Barcelona Designs.
COUNT II
INFRINGEMENT OF REGISTERED HERMAN MILLER
TRADE DRESS AND EAMES® TRADEMARK UNDER 15 U.S.C. §1114
206. Herman Miller asserts this claim of trademark and trade dress infringement
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1114 based upon the intentional copying of (a) Herman Miller’s registered
EAMES® Aluminum Group design, (b) Herman Miller’s registered EAMES® Lounge Chair and
Ottoman designs, (c) Herman Miller’s EAMES® trademark, (d) Herman Miller’s registered
Nelson Bench design, (e) Herman Miller’s registered Sayl Chair design, and (f) Herman Miller’s
registered Setu chair design (collectively, the “Registrations”).
207. Herman Miller has valid and protectable rights in its Registrations.
208. Defendants have marketed and sold chairs that are insubstantially different in visual
appearance from Herman Miller’s registered designs.
209. In the case of the EAMES® Aluminum Group chairs, Defendants have also sold
the accused chairs under the name EAMES®.
of Herman Miller’s designs, or the use of its trademarks.
52
4829-7290-0048.1
211. Defendants’ copying is likely to cause point-of-sale confusion, initial interest
value, and other harms that have been discussed above.
212. Defendants’ unlawful infringement also includes use of Herman Miller trademarks
in internet advertising, whether outwardly visible to the public, or as keywords for online
searching.
213. Defendants’ copying also dilutes Herman Miller’s registered design rights.
214. Defendants’ copying has been deliberate and willful.
the counterfeiting complained of herein.
216. Herman Miller is entitled to an award of compensatory damages, and/or equitable
damages for unjust enrichment.
217. Herman Miller is also entitled to enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees.
COUNT III
COUNTERFEITING OF NOGUCHI® REGISTRATIONS 15 U.S.C. §1114
221. The Noguchi Museum and Herman Miller assert this claim of counterfeiting
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1114 against Defendants based upon their sale of counterfeit NOGUCHI®
Tables under the registered NOGUCHI® Trademarks.
53
4829-7290-0048.1
222. The Noguchi Museum has valid and protectable rights in Trademark Registration
No. 2,648,166 for the trade dress design of the NOGUCHI® Table. These rights are also
exclusively licensed to Herman Miller for the promotion and sale of NOGUCHI® Tables.
223. The Noguchi Museum also has valid and protectable rights in Trademark
Registration No. 2,810,235 for the mark NOGUCHI®. These rights are also exclusively licensed
to Herman Miller with respect to the promotion and sale of NOGUCHI® Tables.
224. Defendants have sold near exact reproductions of NOGUCHI® Tables, and at least
Manhattan Home Design and Mr. Levy have done so using the protected NOGUCHI® trademark.
225. Defendants have no license from the Noguchi Museum or Herman Miller to engage
in the promotion or sale of NOGUCHI® Tables, or to otherwise use the NOGUCHI® trademark.
confusion, and post-sale confusion, resulting in lost sales to Herman Miller and the Noguchi
Museum, diminution in brand value, and other harms that have been discussed above.
227. Defendants’ counterfeiting has been deliberate and willful.
228. Defendants’ copying of Herman Miller’s other furniture designs and website
exacerbates the likelihood of confusion complained of herein.
229. The Noguchi Museum and Herman Miller are entitled to an injunction to stop the
irreparable injuries caused by the counterfeiting complained of herein.
230. The Noguchi Museum and Herman Miller are entitled to elect either treble their
actual damages plus attorneys’ fees under 15 U.S.C. §1117(b), or statutory damages under 15
U.S.C. §1117(c).
231. Allowable statutory damages in this case for willful counterfeiting are up to
$2,000,000 per registration.
54
4829-7290-0048.1
between Mr. Levy and Manhattan Home Design or Barcelona Design.
COUNT IV
INFRINGEMENT OF REGISTERED NOGUCHI
TRADE DRESS AND TRADEMARK UNDER 15 U.S.C. §1114
235. The Noguchi Museum and Herman Miller assert this claim of registered trademark
infringement pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1114 against Defendants based upon their sale of counterfeit
NOGUCHI® Tables under the registered NOGUCHI® Trademarks.
236. The Noguchi Museum has valid and protectable rights in Trademark Registration
No. 2,648,166 for the trade dress design of the NOGUCHI® Table. These rights are also
exclusively licensed to Herman Miller for the promotion and sale of NOGUCHI® Tables.
237. The Noguchi Museum also has valid and protectable rights in Trademark
Registration Nos. 2,810,235 and 2,971,300 for the mark NOGUCHI®. These rights are also
exclusively licensed to Herman Miller with respect to the promotion and sale of NOGUCHI®
Tables.
238. Defendants have sold near exact reproductions of NOGUCHI® Tables, and at least
Manhattan Home Design and Mr. Levy have done so using the protected NOGUCHI® trademark.
239. Defendants have no license from the Noguchi Museum or Herman Miller to engage
in the promotion or sale of NOGUCHI® Tables, or to otherwise use the NOGUCHI® trademark.
55
4829-7290-0048.1
confusion, and post-sale confusion, resulting in lost sales to Herman Miller and the Noguchi
Museum, diminution in brand value, and other harms that have been discussed above.
searching.
242. Defendants’ copying has been deliberate and willful.
243. Defendants’ copying of Herman Miller’s other furniture designs and website
exacerbates the likelihood of confusion complained of herein.
244. The Noguchi Museum and Herman Miller are entitled to an injunction to stop the
irreparable injuries caused by the counterfeiting complained of herein.
245. Plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction to stop the irreparable injuries caused by the
infringement complained of herein.
246. Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of compensatory damages, and/or equitable
247. Plaintiffs are also entitled to enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees.
56
4829-7290-0048.1
COUNT V
INFRINGEMENT OF HERMAN MILLER UNREGISTERED TRADE DRESS AND
TRADEMARKS UNDER 15 U.S.C. §1125(a)
251. Herman Miller asserts this claim of infringement of its unregistered trade dress and
trademark rights pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) against the Defendants.
252. In addition to its registration in the frame of the EAMES® Aluminum Group
Management Chair, Herman Miller has unregistered trade dress rights in the overall appearance of
its Thin Pad and Soft Pad lines of chairs, including the models that the Defendants have so closely
copied.
253. In addition to infringing upon Herman Miller’s unregistered trade dress rights,
Defendants also infringe upon Herman Miller’s unregistered trademark rights in the names
ALUMINUM GROUP, SOFT PAD, and EAMES LOUNGE CHAIR, and EAMES LOUNGE
CHAIR AND OTTOMAN.
254. Additionally, to the extent not otherwise covered by trademark registrations,
Herman Miller claims unregistered trade dress rights in the designs of the Eames Lounge Chair
and Ottoman, the Nelson Bench, the Sayl Chair, and the Setu Chair.
of the foregoing designs, or to use the foregoing trademarks.
256. Defendants’ infringement is likely to cause point-of-sale confusion, initial interest
57
4829-7290-0048.1
searching.
258. Defendants’ infringement has been deliberate and willful.
the infringement complained of herein.
COUNT VI
INFRINGEMENT OF NOGUCHI UNREGISTERED TRADE DRESS AND
TRADEMARKS UNDER 15 U.S.C. §1125(a)
265. The Noguchi Museum and Herman Miller assert this claim of infringement of their
unregistered trade dress and trademark rights pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) against the
Defendants.
266. To the extent not otherwise covered by trademark registrations, The Noguchi
Museum claims unregistered trade dress rights in the design of The Noguchi Table and any variants
thereof, as well as mark “Noguchi” and the name “Noguchi Table.”
58
4829-7290-0048.1
267. Herman Miller, as an exclusive licensee suffering competitive injury, also asserts a
claim under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
268. Defendants have no license from Plaintiffs to engage in the promotion or sale of
the foregoing designs, or to use the foregoing trademarks.
confusion, and post-sale confusion, resulting in lost sales to Plaintiffs, diminution in brand value,
and other harms that have been discussed above.
270. Defendants’ unlawful infringement also includes use of Plaintiffs’ trademarks in
internet advertising, whether outwardly visible to the public, or as keywords for online searching.
272. Plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction to stop the irreparable injuries caused by the
infringement complained of herein.
273. Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of compensatory damages, and/or equitable
274. Plaintiffs are also entitled to enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees.
COUNT VII
DILUTION OF TRADE DRESS UNDER 15 U.S.C. §1125(c)
59
4829-7290-0048.1
278. Herman Miller asserts this claim of trade dress dilution pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
1125(c) against Defendants based upon the intentional copying of Herman Miller’s protected
EAMES® Aluminum Group and EAMES® Lounge Chair and Ottoman trade dress.
279. As is relevant here, Herman Miller has the following valid and protectable rights:
a. Trademark Registrations for the design of EAMES® Aluminum Group
frame and the EAMES® Lounge Chair and Ottoman.
b. Unregistered trade dress rights in the configuration of the EAMES®
Aluminum Group Thin Pad and Soft Pad chairs, including the models that Defendants
have so closely copied.
of Herman Miller’s designs.
281. The registered and unregistered EAMES® Aluminum Group trade and EAMES®
Lounge Chair and Ottoman are famous and widely known in the United States.
282. Defendants’ copying of the EAMES® Aluminum Group and EAMES® Lounge
Chair and Ottoman designs is likely to cause dilution of the distinctiveness of Herman Miller’s
valuable designs, and to undermine Herman Miller’s ability to control its own brand, even among
consumers who know that Defendants are selling knock-offs rather than originals.
283. Defendants’ copying is likely to cause dilution of Herman Miller’s brands through
initial interest confusion, point-of-sale confusion, and post-sale confusion, resulting in lost sales
to Herman Miller, diminution in brand value, and other harms as alleged above.
284. Defendants have deliberately and willfully created a likelihood of dilution, and
caused actual dilution.
60
4829-7290-0048.1
the dilution and likelihood of dilution complained of herein.
286. Herman Miller is entitled to damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
COUNT VIII
DESIGN PATENT INFRINGEMENT
289. Herman Miller brings this claim of design patent infringement against Defendants
with respect to the Setu Design Patents.
290. Herman Miller owns all right and title to the Setu Design Patents.
291. Herman Miller has marked its Setu Chairs in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 287.
292. Defendant’s Salam Chair is insubstantially different from Herman Miller’s
protected designs in the Setu Deign Patents.
of the foregoing designs, or to use the foregoing trademarks.
61
4829-7290-0048.1
searching.
the infringement complained of herein.
COUNT IX
DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AND ACTS UNDER NEW YORK GBL § 349
303. Plaintiffs assert this claim of unfair competition pursuant to New York GBL §340
against Defendants.
304. The same facts that state causes of action under the Lanham Act in the other claims
asserted herein also state causes of action under the New York GBL § 349.
62
4829-7290-0048.1
305. Additionally, Defendants’ use of Plaintiffs’ trademarked terms in internet
advertising constitutes common law unfair competition, even when those words are not directly
visible to consumers when searching the internet.
306. Defendant’s keywords have caused their internet search engine results to become
intermingled with results for Herman Miller, and have resulted in potential customers getting
targeted advertisements for counterfeit products. The use of Plaintiffs’ own trademarks against
themselves in this manner constitutes unfair competition.
307. Defendants’ conduct has been willful.
308. Plaintiffs will continue to suffer irreparable injury absent an injunction.
309. Plaintiffs seeks damages and/or restitution to the extent allowed by the Statute.
COUNT X
COMMON LAW INFRINGEMENT / UNFAIR COMPETITION
313. The same facts that state causes of action under the Lanham Act in the other claims
asserted herein also state causes of action under the common law of the State of New York.
314. Additionally, Defendants’ use of Plaintiffs’ trademarked terms in internet
advertising constitutes common law unfair competition, even when those words are not directly
visible to consumers when searching the internet.
63
4829-7290-0048.1
315. Defendants’ keywords have caused their internet search engine results to become
intermingled with results for Herman Miller, and have resulted in potential customers getting
targeted advertisements for counterfeit products. The use of Plaintiffs’ own trademarks against
themselves in this manner constitutes unfair competition.
316. Defendant’s conduct has been willful.
317. Plaintiffs will continue to suffer irreparable injury absent an injunction.
318. Plaintiffs seek damages to the full extent allowed under the common law.
64
4829-7290-0048.1
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter judgment as follows:
a) Finding Defendants liable for counterfeiting, infringement and dilution of trade
dress and trademark rights under the Lanham Act, New York law, and common law;
b) Finding Defendants liable for design patent infringement;
c) Finding that Defendants’ foregoing misconduct was willful;
d) Enjoining Defendants, their agents, representatives, employees, assigns, and
suppliers, and all persons acting in concert or privity with them, from engaging in the foregoing
misconduct;
e) Awarding Plaintiffs all damages suffered and expenses incurred because of
Defendants’ misconduct, along with Defendants’ infringing profits;
f) Awarding Plaintiffs treble damages;
g) If Plaintiffs elect statutory damages, awarding the maximum $2,000,000 per
infringed registration;
h) Declaring that this an exceptional case and awarding Plaintiffs their reasonable
attorneys’ fees;
i) Awarding Plaintiffs pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages
caused by Defendants’ misconduct; and
j) Granting Plaintiffs such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
proper under the circumstances.
65
4829-7290-0048.1
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs request a trial by jury of
any issues so triable by right.
Dated: November 2, 2020 Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ Jonathan E. Moskin
Jonathan E. Moskin, NY Bar No. 1949031

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
90 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: 212.682.7474
Email: jmoskin@foley.com
Jean-Paul Ciardullo, NY Bar No. 4495594

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
555 S. Flower St., Suite 3300
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: 213.972.4500
Email: jciardullo@foley.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff

HERMAN MILLER, INC.
/s/ Marc P. Misthal

Marc P. Misthal (MM6636)
GOTTLIEB, RACKMAN & REISMAN, P.C.
270 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 684-3900
Email: mmisthal@grr.com
Attorneys for
THE ISAMU NOGUCHI FOUNDATION AND
GARDEN MUSEUM
66
4829-7290-0048.1
Case 1:20-cv-06172-ALC Document 24-1 Filed 11/02/20 Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT A
HERMAN MILLER® Registrations
EXHIBIT B
EAMES® Registration
EXHIBIT C
Eames Aluminum Group Designs
©HermanMiller EAMES
Thin Pad Management Chair
- '
B-
Ti
i
"t
'1
t!
r~*
T
n n
i
%
.
®HermanMiller EAMES
(color variant examples)
V
a n i
i
k
("Cygnus" Upholstery)
>
i:t
ri |«
n r»
• • • r
" J *
Thin Pad Cygnus Management Chair (black frame)
&
Thin Pad Side Chair
Thin Pad Side Chair (white)
* T
i -
Thin Pad Executive Chair
i i -4 * i
#
Tl
i
•',v
- T
• •
n
n
n
Thin Pad Executive Chair (white)
un
:
f
ft
4
Thin Pad Executive Chair
("Cygnus" Upholstery)
S 1
H
•i -»
HI
I
I I J, m
, *
r .
r
£
Thin Pad Executive Chair (black frame)
Thin Pad Lounge Chair
i
Soft Pad Management Chair
I
j
III
6't
A
; A
Soft Pad Management Chair (white)
V 3ri
I :
— \
j s m
& O
* a
Soft Pad Side Chair
n rv
- it • »
Soft Pad Side Chair (white)
c
*
O rv
Ik
MP
r*T-i
0HermanMiller EAMES
Soft Pad Executive Chair
« :(
'
- t
l
1
< . » rTh a
Soft Pad Executive Chair (white)
%
Soft Pad Lounge Chair
L
1
I
I
1
2
j n
i
i
EXHIBIT D
Eames Aluminum Group Registration
EXHIBIT E
Eames Lounge Chair and Ottoman Design
it/
tf >
31
Ik.
|U
zr
*
r^|
EXHIBIT F
Eames Lounge Chair and Ottoman Registrations
Reg. No. 5,767,140 Herman Miller, Inc. (MICHIGAN CORPORATION)

855 East Main Avenue
Registered Jun. 04, 2019 Zeeland, MICHIGAN 49464
CLASS 20: furniture, namely, ottomans

Int. Cl.: 20
FIRST USE 12-31-1956; IN COMMERCE 12-31-1956
Trademark
The mark consists of a three-dimensional configuration of an ottoman comprised of a curved
Principal Register shell holding a cushion with two round buttons at the horizontal midline. The broken lines
depicting (1) the four-point base of the ottoman, (2) the cylindrical piece which attaches the
base of the ottoman to the underside of the shell via a support piece beneath the shell, and (3)
the support piece between the cylindrical piece and the base of the shell indicate placement of
the mark on the goods and are not part of the mark.
SEC.2(F)
SER. NO. 87-902,865, FILED 05-01-2018

Exhibit G
NELSON BENCH Registration

Registered Feb. 12, 2019 Zeeland, MICHIGAN 49464
CLASS 20: furniture, namely, benches

Int. Cl.: 20
Trademark
The mark consists of a three-dimensional configuration of a bench with a slatted top,
Principal Register rectilinear lines, and U-shaped legs.
SEC.2(F)
SER. NO. 87-337,528, FILED 02-15-2017

REQUIREMENTS TO MAINTAIN YOUR FEDERAL TRADEMARK REGISTRATION

WARNING: YOUR REGISTRATION WILL BE CANCELLED IF YOU DO NOT FILE THE
DOCUMENTS BELOW DURING THE SPECIFIED TIME PERIODS.
Requirements in the First Ten Years*

What and When to File:
First Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) between the 5th and 6th
years after the registration date. See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 1141k. If the declaration is accepted, the
registration will continue in force for the remainder of the ten-year period, calculated from the registration
date, unless cancelled by an order of the Commissioner for Trademarks or a federal court.
Second Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application
for Renewal between the 9th and 10th years after the registration date.* See 15 U.S.C. §1059.
Requirements in Successive Ten-Year Periods*

What and When to File:
You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application for Renewal
between every 9th and 10th-year period, calculated from the registration date.*
Grace Period Filings*
The above documents will be accepted as timely if filed within six months after the deadlines listed above with
the payment of an additional fee.
*ATTENTION MADRID PROTOCOL REGISTRANTS: The holder of an international registration with an

extension of protection to the United States under the Madrid Protocol must timely file the Declarations of Use
(or Excusable Nonuse) referenced above directly with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
The time periods for filing are based on the U.S. registration date (not the international registration date). The
deadlines and grace periods for the Declarations of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) are identical to those for
nationally issued registrations. See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 1141k. However, owners of international registrations
do not file renewal applications at the USPTO. Instead, the holder must file a renewal of the underlying
international registration at the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization, under
Article 7 of the Madrid Protocol, before the expiration of each ten-year term of protection, calculated from the
date of the international registration. See 15 U.S.C. §1141j. For more information and renewal forms for the
international registration, see http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/.
NOTE: Fees and requirements for maintaining registrations are subject to change. Please check the
USPTO website for further information. With the exception of renewal applications for registered
extensions of protection, you can file the registration maintenance documents referenced above online at h
ttp://www.uspto.gov.
NOTE: A courtesy e-mail reminder of USPTO maintenance filing deadlines will be sent to trademark
owners/holders who authorize e-mail communication and maintain a current e-mail address with the
USPTO. To ensure that e-mail is authorized and your address is current, please use the Trademark
Electronic Application System (TEAS) Correspondence Address and Change of Owner Address Forms
available at http://www.uspto.gov.
Page: 2 of 2 / RN # 5672151
EXHIBIT H
Sayl Chair Registration

Registered Nov. 14, 2017 Zeeland, MICHIGAN 49464
CLASS 20: Furniture, namely, chairs

Int. Cl.: 20
Trademark
The mark consists of a three-dimensional configuration of a backrest of a chair which
Principal Register simulates the shape of a mainsail and is narrower at the top and then gradually widens. The
broken lines depicting (1) the base comprised of legs and wheels, (2) the cylindrical piece
which attaches the base of the chair to the seat of the chair, (3) the seat carrier, (4) the height
actuator and seat adjustment lever, (5) the contoured seat, (6) the Y-shaped backrest frame,
(7) the webbed pattern which spans the entire backrest, and (8) the arm rests indicate
placement of the mark on the goods and are not part of the mark.
SEC.2(F)
SER. NO. 86-950,903, FILED 03-23-2016

EXHIBIT I
Setu Chair Registration

Registered Apr. 04, 2017 Zeeland, MI 49464
CLASS 20: furniture, namely, chairs

Int. Cl.: 20
Trademark
The mark consists of a three-dimensional configuration of a backrest of a chair with a curved
Principal Register edge at the top of the backrest connected to the seat of the chair with a curved front edge
together forming the shape of a scroll and the shape of the armrests of a chair that resemble
ribbons. The broken lines depicting (1) the base comprised of legs and wheels, (2) the
cylindrical piece which attaches the base of the chair to the seat of the chair, (3) the horizontal
pieces which anchor the backrest and seat material in place, and (4) the "H" shaped backrest
frame with vertical sides appearing with spine-like features and openings which simulate
vertebrae indicate placement of the mark on the goods and are not part of the mark.
SEC.2(F)
SER. NO. 86-969,863, FILED 04-08-2016

JENNIFER D RICHARDSON, EXAMINING ATTORNEY
EXHIBIT J
Setu Design Patents
USOOD6594.17S
(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D659,417 S

Schmitz et al. (45) Date of Patent: . May 15, 2012
(54) CHAIR AND COMPONENTS THEREOF OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(75) Inventors: Johann Burkhard Schmitz, Berlin Herman Miller for Business, "Eames Aluminum Group & Soft Pad
Chairs,” online retrieved from internet: URL http://www.
(DE); Claudia Plikat, Berlin (DE): hermanmiller.com/CDA/SSA/Product? 1,1592, a 10-c440-p39,00.
Carola E. M. Zwick, Berlin (DE): html, retrieved—date unknown, 2 pages.
Roland R. O. Zwick, Berlin (DE)
(Continued)
(73) Assignee: Herman Miller, Inc., Zeeland, MI (US)
Primary Examiner — Caron D. Veynar
(**) Term: 14 Years Assistant Examiner — Ricky Pham
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Brinks Hofer Gilson &
(21) Appl. No. 29/363,143 Lione
(22) Filed: Jun. 4, 2010 (57) CLAM
(51) LOC (9) Cl. .................................................. 06-01 The ornamental design for a chair and components thereof, as
(52) U.S. Cl. ........................................................ D6/366 shown and described.
(58) Field of Classification Search ........... D6/334-336, DESCRIPTION
D6/360 380, 500-502; 297/.445.1, 446.1,
297/.447.7, 452.63 FIG. 1 is a perspective view of a chair and components
See application file for complete search history. thereof;
(56) References Cited FIG. 2 is a left side view of the chair and components thereof
shown in FIG. 1;
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS Es 3 is agide view of the chair and components thereof
946,225. AA
2,163,078 6,1/1910 Irwin
1939 Zerbee FRIECaview of une
. 4 is a rear view of the chair and componentsts unereo
chair and thereof
2,771,122 A 1 1/1956 Straub shown in FIG. 1;
3,041,109 A 6, 1962 Eames et al. FIG. 5 is a front view of the chair and components thereof
3,120.407 A 2/1964 Propst shown in FIG. 1;
3,230,011 A 1/1966 Propst
3,586,370 A 6, 1971 Barecki et al. t 6 is f of the chair and components thereof
3,640,576 A 2f1972 Morrison et al. SnOWn 1n FIU. 1, and,
(Continued) FIG. 7 is a bottom view of the chair and components thereof
shown in FIG. 1.
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS Any broken lines in the drawings are for illustrative purposes
AU 656.3380 A1 1, 1983
to show boundaries and form no part of the claimed design.
(Continued) 1 Claim, 7 Drawing Sheets
US D659,417 S
Page 2
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS D528,811 S 9/2006 Giugiaro

3,844.612
D235,298 S
A 10/1974 Borggren et al.
6, 1975 Schuyler
R388. S.
D535,831 S
2996 Giugiaro
1/2007 Huang ........................... D6,366
4036527 A 7, 1977 y D540,557 S $39, Doughty
4,062,590 A 12/1977 Polsky et al. B.E. s 398, etal
4,230,365 A 10/1980 Messinger D543,039 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,522,444 A 6, 1985 Pollock D543,040 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,533,177 A 8, 1985 Latone D543.04 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,592,126 A 6, 1986 Bottemiller D543,042 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,703.974. A 1 1/1987 Bräuning D543369 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,889,385 A 12/1989 Chadwick D543.371 S 5, 2007 Wan
Sis
5103.196 A
38: E. 1
4/1992 El
D543.385 S 356, Eet al.
D543,388 S * 5/2007 Machael et al. ............... D6,501
D348,570 S 7, 1994 Scheper et al. ... D6,366 ES 3932 Stal
5,352,022 SA
D354,631 *
10,1/1995
1994 Orlandini
Knoblock et al. .............. D6,366
7243,993 B2 7/2007 Igarashi et al.
D550.467 St 9/2007 Koepke etal D6,366
5,518.294.
A 5/1996 Ligon, Sr. et al. oepke et al. .................
D377,431 S 1/1997 Stumpfetal D550,471 S. 9/2007 Igarashi
5649,743 A 7, 1997 SE D550,977 S 9/2007 Igarashi
D386,023 S 11, 1997 SR tal D552,368 S 10/2007 Scheper et al.
D390026 S 2, 1998 Bi E. C. a. D552,882 S 10/2007 Saotome
5954,399 A 9/1999 ise D554,384 S 11/2007 Scheper et al.
5.975,634. A 11/1999
6,015, 187 A
Knoblocket al.
1/2000 Roslund et al.
R3: s 1858 gashi
D422,802 S 4, 2000 D D559,000 S 1/2008 Vanderminden
6,070,937 A 6, 2000 in D560,381 S * 1/2008 Dauphin ............. D6,366
6.16,686 A 9, 2000 t D564,766 S * 3/2008 Zimmermann et al. D6,366
6.2010 A 9, 2000 Zimmerman D568,074 S * 5/2008 Koepke et al. ................. D6,501
D435,976 s 1/2001 Deacon D572,915 S 7/2008 Doughty
D436,259
D436.260 SS 1/2001 Nagami
1/2001 Nagamitsu R16 S.
D589,271 S 299 Muller
3/2009 Neil ............................... D6,366
D437.133 S 2, 2001 NE D591,986 S 5/2009 Schmitz et al.
D437.703 S 2, 2001 Ngatsu D618,469 S * 6/2010 Romero ......................... D6,366
D441977 S 5, 2001 D641,576 S * 7/2011 Giugiaro ........................ D6,502
D442,383 S 5, 2001 yer D647,717 S * 1 1/2011 Zund et al. ..................... D6,366
D444.309 S T/2001 S. it 2004/0245839 A1* 12/2004 Bodnar et al. ........... 297/.452.63
6.257,665 B1 7/2001 NE tal 2006/0238.009 A1 10/2006 Igarashi et al.
D449.173 S 10, 2001 " SU ca. 2006/0244295 A1 1 1/2006 Igarashi et al.
ES 583 R e
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
6,505,890 B2 1/2003 Riley et al. DE 4433663 A1 3, 1996
D469,618 S 2/2003 Nagamitsu DE 19916411 A1 11, 2000
D469,970 S 2/2003 Molteni EP O49310 B1, 3, 1985
D474,051 S 5/2003 Tseng EP 860355 A1 8/1998
D474,052 S 5, 2003 True EP 1040999 A2 10, 2000
D476,493 S 7/2003 Nagamitsu FR 27.15124 A1 T 1995
D476,820 S 7/2003 Nagamitsu JP D1284784 10, 2006
D481,560 S 11/2003 Vidmar et al. LU 88528 A 3, 1996
D482.542 S 11/2003 Pluer
D487,359 S 3/2004 Giugiaro OTHER PUBLICATIONS
D489,542 S 5/2004 Giugiaro United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark, Principal
36 R: 38: SE Register, Reg. No. 3,105,591, registered Jun. 20, 2006, 1 page.
D5 05969 S 9, 2005 Loew etal Okamura Corporation, “Baron Ergonomic Mesh Chair,” copyright
D511629 S 11/2005 Caldwell 2005, online retrieved from internet: URL http://www.okamura.co.
D512578 S 12/2005 Igarashi jp/english/product? office/baron/index.html), retrieved on Mar. 31.
D512,579 S 12/2005 Igarashi 2008), 1 page.
D513.910 S 1/2006 Gehry U.S. Appl. No. 29/363,349, entitled Body Support Structure, for
6,986,549 B2 1/2006 Kniese inventors Schmitz et al., filed Jun. 8, 2010.
6,991,291 B2 1/2006 Knoblocket al. U.S. Appl. No. 29/363,351, entitled Body Support Structure, for
D514,345 S 2, 2006 Igarashi inventors Schmitz et al., filed Jun. 8, 2010.
D514,838 S 2/2006 Igarashi U.S. Appl. No. 29/291,968, entitled Body Support Structure, for
D526.495 S 8 2006 Albin Inventors Schmitz et al., filed Sep. 21, 2007.
5.538 3. Sh
Iuglaro
et al. Keilhauer brochure, “Filo'. 2001(C), 4 pages.
D528,810 S 9/2006 Giugiaro * cited by examiner
U.S. Patent May 15, 2012 Sheet 1 of 7 US D659,417 S



:
U.S. Patent May 15, 2012 Sheet 5 Of 7 US D659,417 S

---&----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------&---------------
U.S. Patent May 15, 2012 Sheet 7 Of 7 US D659,417 S
%&
USOOD628831S
(12) Schmitz
Unitedet al.States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: USD628,831 S
(45) Date of Patent: . Dec. 14, 2010
(54) BODY SUPPORT STRUCTURE OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(75) Inventors: Johann Burkhard Schmitz, Berlin Faraday, “Exploring Biomimetrics for Products & Packaging”, Sep.
(DE); Claudia Plikat, Berlin (DE): 27, 2007, 3 pages.
Carola Eva Marianne Zwick, Berlin Herman Miller for Business, "Eames Aluminum Group & Soft Pad
(DE); Roland Rolf Otto Zwick, Berlin Chairs,” online retrieved from internet: URL http://www.
(DE) hermanmiller.com/CDA/SSA/Product? 1,1592, a 10-c440-p39,00.
html, retrieved—date unknown, 2 pages.
(73) Assignee: Herman Miller, Inc., Zeeland, MI (US)
(Continued)
(**) Term: 14 Years
Primary Examiner Elizabeth A Albert
(21) Appl. No.: 29/363,349 Assistant Examiner Kelley A. Donnelly
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm—Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione
(22) Filed: Jun. 8, 2010
(57) CLAM
Related U.S. Application Data
The ornamental design for a body Support structure, as shown
(60) Continuation of application No. 29/336,956, filed on and described.
May 12, 2009, now abandoned, which is a division of
application No. 29/291,968, filed on Sep. 21, 2007,
now Pat. No. Des. 591,986. DESCRIPTION
(51) LOC (9) Cl. .................................................. 06-04
(52) U.S. Cl. ....................................................... D6/SO2 FIG. 1 is a perspective view of a first embodiment of a body
(58) Field of Classification Search .................. D6/323, Support structure;
D6/328,334,370–371, 373-374,376, 379–380, FIG. 2 is a front view of the body support structure shown in
D6/500-502; 297/.446 FIG. 1:
See application file for complete search history. FIG. 3 is a rear view of the body support structure shown in
(56) References Cited FIG. 1:
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS FIG. 4 is a right side view of the body support structure shown
in FIG. 1;
946,225 A 1/1910 Irwin FIG. 5 is a left side view of the body support structure shown
2,771,122 A 11, 1956 Straub
3,041,109 A 6, 1962 Eames et al.
in FIG. 1;
3,120.407 A 2/1964 Propst FIG. 6 is a top view of the body support structure shown in
FIG. 1; and,
FIG. 7 is a bottom view of the body support structure shown
(Continued) in FIG. 1.
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS The broken lines showing ribs, openings and/or cross-bars in
AU 656.3380 A1 1, 1983 FIGS. 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7 are for environmental purposes only
and do not form any part of the claimed design.
(Continued) 1 Claim, 7 Drawing Sheets
USD628,831 S
Page 2
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS D528,811 S 9/2006 Giugiaro

D528,812 S 9/2006 Giugiaro
3,230,011 A 1/1966 Propst D540,557 S 4/2007 Doughty
3,586,370 A 6, 1971 Barecki et al. D542,549 S 5, 2007 Hara
3,640,576 A 2f1972 Morrison et al. D542,580 S 5/2007 Loew et al.
3,844,612 A 10/1974 Borggren et al. D543,039 S 5, 2007 Hara
D235,298 S 6/1975 Schuyler D543,040 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,036,527 A T. 1977 Faul D543,041 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,062,590 A 12/1977 Polsky et al. D543,042 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,230,365 A 10/1980 Messinger D543,369 S 5, 2007 Hara
4,522,444 A 6, 1985 Pollock D543,371 S 5/2007 Wang
4,592,126 A 6, 1986 Bottemiller D543,385 S 5/2007 Loew et al.
4,889,385 A 12/1989 Chadwicket al. D543,397 S 5/2007 Loew et al.
D320,034 S 9, 1991 Brooks et al. D543,736 S 6, 2007 Shields
5,352,022 A 10/1994 Knoblock 7.243,993 B2 7/2007 Igarashi et al.
5,518.294 A 5/1996 Ligon, Sr. et al. D550,471 S 9/2007 Igarashi
D377,431 S 1/1997 Stumpfet al. D550,977 S 9/2007 Igarashi
5,649,743 A 7/1997 Skalka D552,368 S 10/2007 Scheper et al.
D386,023 S 11/1997 Stumpfet al. D552,882 S 10/2007 Saotome
D390,026 S 2f1998 Biecher D554.384 S 11/2007 Scheper et al.
5,954,399 A 9/1999 Hong D555,924 S 11/2007 Igarashi
5,975,634 A 11/1999 Knoblocket al. D557,921 S 12/2007 Kane
6,015, 187 A 1/2000 Roslund et al. D559,000 S 1/2008 Vanderminden
D436,259 S 1/2001 Nagamitsu D572,915 S 7/2008 Doughty
D436,260 S 1/2001 Nagamitsu D573,816 S 7, 2008 Muller
D437,132 S 2/2001 Nagamitsu D591,986 S * 5/2009 Schmitz et al. .............. D6,502
D441,977 S 5, 2001 Vaaler D605,880 S * 12/2009 Muller .... D6,500
D442,383 S 5, 2001 Bell D606,779 S * 12/2009 Muller . D6,500
D444,309 S 7/2001 Nagamitsu D611,276 S * 3/2010 Kubryk D6,500
6.257,665 B1 7/2001 Nagamitsu et al. D611,740 S * 3/2010 Koh . D6,500
D465,347 S 11/2002 Bell D612,175 S * 3/2010 Kubryk ....................... D6,500
6,505,890 B2 1/2003 Riley et al. 2006/0238.009 A1 10/2006 Igarashi et al.
D469,618 S 2/2003 Nagamitsu 2006/0244295 A1 1 1/2006 Igarashi et al.
D469,970 S 2/2003 Molteni
D476,493 S 7/2003 Nagamitsu FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
D476,820 S 7/2003 Nagamitsu
D481,560 S 11/2003 Vidmar et al. DE 4433663 A1 3, 1996
D482.542 S 11/2003 Pluer DE 19916411 A1 11, 2000
D487,359 S 3/2004 Giugiaro EP O49310 B1, 3, 1985
D489,542 S 5/2004 Giugiaro EP 860355 A1 8/1998
6,749,261 B2 6/2004 Knoblocket al. EP 1040999 A2 10, 2000
D509,969 S 9, 2005 Loew et al. FR 27.15124 A1 T 1995
D51 1,629 S 11/2005 Caldwell JP D1284784 10, 2006
D512.578 S 12/2005 Igarashi LU 88528 A 3, 1996
D512,579 S 12/2005 Igarashi
D513.910 S 1/2006 Gehry OTHER PUBLICATIONS
6,986,549 B2 1/2006 Kniese United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark, Principal
6,991,291 B2 1/2006 Knoblocket al. Register, Reg. No. 3,105,591, registered Jun. 20, 2006, 1 page.
D514,345 S 2/2006 Igarashi Okamura Corporation, “Baron Ergonomic Mesh Chair,” copyright
D514,838 S 2/2006 Igarashi 2005, online retrieved from internet: URL http://www.okamura.co.
D526.495 S 8, 2006 Albin jp/english/product office/baron/index.html), retrieved on Mar. 31.
7,097,249 B2 8/2006 Igarashi et al. 2008), 1 page.
D527,920 S 9/2006 Giugiaro
D528,810 S 9/2006 Giugiaro * cited by examiner
U.S. Patent Dec. 14, 2010 Sheet 1 of 7 USD628,831 S
Fig. 1
RXXXX
XXXXXX
&
S&
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
U.S. Patent Dec. 14, 2010 Sheet 5 Of 7 USD628,831 S

&
SSR
s
Fig. 6
U.S. Patent Dec. 14, 2010 Sheet 7 Of 7 USD628,831 S

USOOD59 1986S
(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D591,986 S

Schmitz et al. (45) Date of Patent: . May 12, 2009
(54) BODY SUPPORT STRUCTURE D386,023 S 1 1/1997 Stumpfet al.
D390,026 S * 2/1998 Biecher ....................... D6,375
(75) Inventors: Johann Burkhard Schmitz, Berlin 5,954,399 A 9/1999 Hong
(DE); Claudia Plikat, Berlin (DE): 5,975,634 A 11/1999 Knoblocket al.
Carola Eva Marianne Zwick, Berlin 6,015, 187 A 1/2000 Roslund, Jr. et al.
(DE);s Roland Rolf Otto Zwick,s Berlin D436,259 S
D436,260 S
1/2001 Nagamitsu
1/2001 Nagamitsu
(DE) D437,132 S 2/2001 Nagamitsu
D441,977 S 5, 2001 Vaaler . ... D6,380
(73) Assignee: Herman Miller, Inc., Zeeland, MI (US) D442,383 S 5/2001 Bell ............................ D6,375
(**) Term: 14 Years 6.257,665 B1 7/2001 Nagamitsu et al.
D465,347 S * 1 1/2002 Bell ............................ D6,376
(21) Appl. No. 29/291,968 6,505,890 B2 1/2003 Riley et al.
(22) Filed: Sep. 21, 2007 D469,970 S * 2/2003 Molteni ....................... D6,374
(51) LOC (9) Cl. .................................................. 06-04 D476,820 S 7/2003 Nagamitsu
(52) U.S. Cl. ....................................................... D6/SO2
(58) Field of Classification Search .................. D6/323, (Continued)
D6/328,334,370–371, 373-374,376, 379–380,
D6/500-502; 297/.446 FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
See application file for complete search history. AU 656.3380 A1 1, 1983
(56) References Cited
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
(Continued)
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
946,225 A 1/1910 Irwin
2,771,122 A 11, 1956 Straub Faraday, “Exploring Biomimetrics for Products & Packaging”, Sep.
3,041,109 A 6, 1962 Eames et al. 27, 2007, 3 pages.
3,120.407 A 2/1964 Propst
3,230,011 A 1/1966 Propst (Continued)
3,586,370 A 6, 1971 Barecki et al.
3,640,576 A 2, 1972 Morrison et al. timary
ssistant Examiner
Examiner Elizabeth
Kelley A. ADonnelly
Albert
3,844,612 A
D235,298 S * 10/1974 Borggren
6/1975 Schuyler ...................... 74). Att A t, or Firm Brinks Hofer Gil & Li
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione
4,036,527 A T. 1977 Faul
4,062,590 A 12/1977 Polsky et al. (57) CLAM
3.SS g Myer The ornamental design for a body Support structure, as shown
4,592,126 A 6/1986 Bottemiller and described.
4,889,385 A 12/1989 Chadwick
D320,034 S * 9, 1991 Brooks et al. .................. D17/9 DESCRIPTION
5,352,022 A 10, 1994 Knoblock
5,518.294 A 5/1996 Ligon, Sr. et al. FIG. 1 is a perspective view of a body support structure:
D377,431 S 1/1997 Stumpfet al. FIG. 2 is a front view of the body support structure shown in
5,649,743 A 7, 1997 Skalka FIG. 1:
US D591,986 S
Page 2
FIG. 3 is a rear view of the body support structure shown in U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
FIG. 1: D481,560 S * 1 1/2003 Vidmar et al. ............... D6,491
FIG. 4 is a right side view of the body support structure shown D482,542 S 1 1/2003 Pluer ........................... D6,375
D487,359 S 3/2004 Giugiaro
in FIG. 1; D489,542 S 5/2004 Giugiaro
FIG. 5 is a left side view of the body support structure shown 6,749,261 B2 6/2004 Knoblocket al.
D509,969 S 9/2005 Loew et al. .................. D6,366
in FIG. 1; D51 1,629 S 1 1/2005 Caldwell ..................... D6,375
FIG. 6 is a top view of the body support structure shown in D512,578 S 12/2005 Igarashi
FIG. 1; and, D512,579 S 12/2005 Igarashi
D513.910 S * 1/2006 Gehry ......................... D6,500
FIG. 7 is a bottom view of the body support structure shown 6,986,549 B2 1/2006 Kniese
in FIG. 1. 6,991,291 B2 1/2006 Knoblocket al.
The broken lines showing ribs and/or openings in FIGS. 1, 4, D514,345 S 2/2006 Igarashi
D514,838 S 2/2006 Igarashi
and 5 are for environmental purposes only and do not form D526,495 S * 8/2006 Albin .......................... D6,348
any part of the claimed design. 7,097,249 B2 8/2006 Igarashi et al.
D527,920 S 9/2006 Giugiaro
The cross hatch pattern that can be seen in FIGS. 1,2,3,6, and D528,810 S 9/2006 Giugiaro
7 represents texture of the surface material and is distributed D528,811 S 9/2006 Giugiaro
uniformly over the surfaces on which it is only partially D528,812 S 9/2006 Giugiaro
represented. D540,557 S * 4/2007 Doughty ...................... D6,375
D542,549 S 5, 2007 Hara
D542,580 S * 5/2007 Loew et al. .................. D6,502
1 Claim, 7 Drawing Sheets D543,039 S 5, 2007 Hara
D543,040 S 5, 2007 Hara
D543,041 S 5, 2007 Hara
D543,042 S 5, 2007 Hara
D543,369 S 5, 2007 Hara
D543,371 S * 5/2007 Wang .......................... D6,375
D543,385 S * 5/2007 Loew et al. .................. D6,500
D543,397 S * 5/2007 Loew et al. .................. D6,502
D543,736 S * 6/2007 Shields ........................ D6,500
7,243,993 B2 7/2007 Igarashi et al.
D550,471 S 9/2007 Igarashi
D550,977 S 9/2007 Igarashi
D552,368 S * 10/2007 Scheper et al. ............... D6,375
D552,882 S 10/2007 Saotome
D554.384 S * 1 1/2007 Scheper et al. ............... D6,374
D555,924 S 11/2007 Igarashi
D557,921 S * 12/2007 Kane ........................... D6,375
D559,000 S * 1/2008 Vanderminden, Sr. ........ D6/375
D572,915 S * 7/2008 Doughty ........ D6,334
D573,816 S * 7/2008 Muller ........................ D6,502
2006/0238.009 A1 10/2006 Igarashi et al.
2006/0244295 A1 1 1/2006 Igarashi et al.
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
DE 4433663 A1 3, 1996
DE 19916411 A1 11, 2000
EP O49310 B1 3, 1985
EP 860355 A1 8, 1998
EP 1040999 A2 10, 2000
FR 27.15124 A1 7, 1995
JP D1284784 10, 2006
LU 88528 A 3, 1996
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
Herman Miller for Business, "Eames Aluminum Group & Soft Pad
Chairs,” online retrieved from internet: URL http://www.
hermanmiller.com/CDA/SSA Product? 1,1592, a 10-ca.40
p39m,00lhtml), retrieved—date unknown), 2 pages.
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark, Principal
Register, Reg. No. 3,105,591, registered Jun. 20, 2006, 1 page.
Okamura Corporation, “Baron Ergonomic Mesh Chair,” copyright
2005, online retrieved from internet: URL http://www.okamura.co.
jp/english/product office/baron/index.html), retrieved on Mar. 31.
2008), 1 page.
* cited by examiner
U.S. Patent May 12, 2009 Sheet 1 of 7 US D591,986S
Fig. 1

Fig. 3

U.S. Patent May 12, 2009 Sheet 5 Of 7 US D591,986S
S.SS.
Patent May 12, 2009 Sheet 6 of 7 US D591,986S

U.S. Patent May 12, 2009 Sheet 7 Of 7 US D591,986S

EXHIBIT K
NOGUCHI® Registration
and
NOGUCHI® Table
Registration

Herman Miller v. Manhattan Home Design - Complaint

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Herman Miller v. Manhattan Home Design - Complaint

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Case 1:20-cv-06172-ALC Document 24 Filed 11/02/20 Page 1 of 66

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

HERMAN MILLER, INC. and Case No. 1:20-cv-6172-ALC

MANHATTAN HOME DESIGN LLC, (3) INFRINGEMENT

counterfeiting, dilution, infringement, and unfair competition against Defendants Manhattan

Home Design LLC, Barcelona Designs, and Daniel Javier Levy.

2. Plaintiff The Noguchi Museum is a non-profit New York Education Corporation

Manhattan Home Design operates a website at <<www.manhattanhomedesign.com>>.

Designs operates a website at <<www.barcelona-designs.com>>.

subject to common ownership and control, including by Daniel J. Levy.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

infringement and unfair competition under the common law.

because Plaintiffs’ damages hereunder exceed the statutory threshold.

expressly consented to it.

product in this District.

of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this District.

business of designing, manufacturing, distributing, and selling high-quality, design-oriented

widely loved by their users.

Charles and Ray Eames

wife, Ray Eames.

known in the industry and touted heavily in Herman Miller’s marketing.

in connection with its furniture, since at least 1951.

America and elsewhere for EAMES® chairs and furniture.

The EAMES® Aluminum Group Chairs

variety is depicted below:

are attached hereto as Exhibit C.

EAMES® designs. Exhibit C illustrates these variations.

registered trade dress rights in the distinctive frame with armrests.

different model variants of the same car.

chairs, and hence became a prominent distinguishing feature.

chairs is the use of “scroll” edges of the seat and backrest.

the backrest and seat.

because of their aesthetic appeal and distinctiveness.

Group chairs identifies and distinguishes them from competitors’ chairs.

museums, including the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.

complained of in this civil action.

chairs following a jury trial.

61. US TM Registration No. 3,105,591 is now incontestable. The registration provides

in connection with furniture. A copy of the registration certificate is attached as Exhibit D.

that is sufficiently similar thereto as to be likely to cause confusion, regardless of possible

the rest of the car.

exclusively to Herman Miller.

burden to prove otherwise.

and fame as an indicator that Herman Miller is the source of goods.

for all the same reasons as the trade dress.

The EAMES® Lounge Chair and Ottoman

72. An example of the EAMES® Lounge chair (with accompanying ottoman) is

appearance of the chairs as seen by consumers.

equivalent functionalities while having a distinctly different aesthetic.

identifies and distinguishes them from competitors’ chairs.

by countless more individuals than just their owners.

including the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.

“mid-century modern.” The recent resurgence in popularity of mid-century modern design –

this civil action.

83. EAMES® Lounge Chairs are recognized as “iconic” in the marketplace.

Eames design legacy in perpetuity.

(without an ottoman), as depicted below:

88. US TM Registration No. 2,716,843 is now incontestable. The registration provides

connection with furniture. A copy of the registration certificate is attached as Exhibit F.

below. A copy of the registration certificate is attached as Exhibit F.

these design belongs exclusively to Herman Miller.

burden to prove otherwise.

same reasons that the trade dress is well-known.

The Nelson Bench