Gucci America, Inc. v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC et al.
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-10239
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
In Gucci America v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm, Judge Schofield adopted damages and contempt recommendations, awarded $1.3 million, and denied Gucci’s additional sanctions requests.
Gucci America, Inc. received $1,300,000 in damages and obtained continuation of the permanent injunction. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC was held in civil contempt, remained subject to the injunction, and was denied relief from the contempt-related consequences. Gucci’s requests for additional damages and coercive sanctions were denied.
What happened
In Gucci America, Inc. v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC et al., Gucci sued Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC over counterfeit and infringing products bearing Gucci marks. The defendant stopped participating after its lawyer withdrew, and the court previously entered a default judgment against it.
The court reviewed recommendations concerning damages and contempt. It found no clear error and adopted both recommendations. Gucci received $1.3 million in statutory damages, and Lord & Taylor Ecomm was found in civil contempt for failing to destroy or deliver counterfeit products and failing to file a required compliance report.
Judge Schofield denied Gucci’s requests for $10 million in enhanced damages, compensation equal to the defendant’s later profits, and $3,000-per-day coercive sanctions. The court permanently continued the injunction, awarded no additional damages for contempt, and directed the clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Gucci America, Inc. v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC et al. · No. 1:23-cv-10239
- Lorna Schofield
- Oct. 17, 2025
Background
Gucci America, Inc. sued Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC under the federal trademark statute, the Lanham Act, and under New York law. The claims concerned trademark counterfeiting and infringement, unfair competition, false designation of origin, and trademark dilution. Lord & Taylor appeared and answered, but its lawyer later received permission to withdraw, after which Lord & Taylor stopped participating.
In an August 16, 2024, order, the court entered a default judgment against Lord & Taylor on all claims. That order permanently prohibited Lord & Taylor from unauthorized use of Gucci’s specified word and design marks. It also required Lord & Taylor to destroy or turn over materials containing or referring to those marks and to file a sworn written report describing its compliance.
Damages recommendation
The damages issue was referred to Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky for a post-default damages proceeding. Her April 9, 2025, Amended Report and Recommendation recommended striking Lord & Taylor’s answer, permanently enjoining infringement, and awarding Gucci $1,300,000 in statutory damages under the Lanham Act.
Gucci had sought the maximum statutory award of $14,000,000 based on three registered marks: the GUCCI Word Mark, the Interlocking GG Mark, and the Horsebit Mark. The recommendation awarded damages based only on the first two marks because the complaint did not adequately allege that Gucci owned the Horsebit Mark or that it was registered and valid. The recommended $1,300,000 consisted of $1,000,000 for use of the GUCCI Word Mark on handbags, $150,000 for use of that mark on belts, and $150,000 for use of the Interlocking GG Mark on belts.
No objections were filed to the Damages Report. The court therefore reviewed the report for clear error on the face of the record and found none.
Contempt recommendation and requested sanctions
The prior default judgment found that Lord & Taylor had willfully and intentionally counterfeited at least three Gucci marks on handbags, shoes, and belts. Lord & Taylor did not provide proof that it destroyed the counterfeit products, did not turn them over to Gucci, and did not file the required compliance report. Gucci submitted evidence that Lord & Taylor had not meaningfully responded to its compliance demands, and Lord & Taylor submitted no evidence rebutting that account.
Magistrate Judge Tarnofsky recommended finding Lord & Taylor in civil contempt. The recommendation stated that Lord & Taylor had asserted financial distress and that seizure of the infringing goods appeared to be the only way to ensure compliance. Gucci later withdrew its request for seizure after reporting that Lord & Taylor had sold and vacated the warehouse where the goods had been available for inspection. Gucci continued to seek a contempt finding.
Gucci later requested $10,000,000 in enhanced statutory damages, compensation equal to Lord & Taylor’s profits from later sales of counterfeit products, and coercive sanctions of $3,000 for each day of future violation. The court treated the first and third requests as compensatory requests that amounted to untimely objections to the Damages Report. Those requests were denied. The court also denied the daily coercive sanctions because Gucci had not shown that Lord & Taylor still possessed the goods, could surrender them, or had the financial resources to pay the sanctions. The court concluded that the requested sanctions would likely be ineffective and unreasonable in the circumstances.
Ruling
Judge Schofield adopted the Damages Report and permanently enjoined Lord & Taylor as provided in the prior default judgment. Gucci was awarded $1,300,000 in damages. The court also adopted the Contempt Report, held Lord & Taylor in civil contempt, and awarded Gucci no further damages. The clerk was directed to close the case.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.