Oomph Innovations LLC v. Shenzhen Bolsesic Electronics Co. Ltd.

Background

Oomph Innovations LLC manufactures, markets, and sells a hair-volumizing product called VOLOOM. It alleged that Shenzhen Bolsesic Electronics Co. Ltd. (SBE), Guangzhou WellTop Electronic Co., Ltd. (WellTop), and UKLISS Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. (UKLISS) sold similar hair-volumizing products that infringed U.S. Patent No. 8,839,802. Oomph also alleged that the defendants’ packaging and promotional materials infringed Oomph’s copyrights.

Oomph sued under the Patent Act and Copyright Act. The defendants were served with the complaint and with the court’s preliminary-injunction orders, but none of them answered or appeared. The clerk entered default against SBE on January 27, 2020, and against WellTop and UKLISS on June 19, 2020. Oomph then moved for default judgment.

Court’s Analysis

Before entering judgment, the court found that it had subject-matter jurisdiction because the claims arose under federal law. It also found personal jurisdiction and proper venue based in part on allegations that the defendants sold products to California residents through interactive websites.

For default judgment, the court applied the seven factors commonly used in the Ninth Circuit. Because the defendants had not appeared, Oomph would lack another way to seek relief if default judgment were denied. The court found that Oomph adequately pleaded both patent and copyright infringement. It treated the complaint’s factual allegations as true, except allegations concerning damages, and found little likelihood of a factual dispute because the defendants had not responded. The court also found no indication that the defendants’ failure to respond resulted from excusable neglect.

For damages, Oomph estimated that 6,438 accused-product units had been sold, using information about refunded purchases, identified product listings, an average sale price of $58, and an assumed 25-percent profit margin. The court corrected an overstatement in Oomph’s product count but found the method reasonable and calculated estimated lost profits of $93,351. The court found that continuing to sell the accused products after an express admission of infringement demonstrated deliberate and bad-faith conduct, warranting enhanced damages under the Patent Act.

The court found the case exceptional under the Patent Act’s attorney-fee provision because of the evidence of willful infringement. It accepted Oomph’s billing rates, hours, and supporting records as reasonable. It also found the requested costs, including legal research, filing-system charges, translation, and international service expenses, reasonable. Finally, the court found irreparable injury, no adequate legal remedy, a favorable balance of hardships, and a public interest in preventing infringing products from entering the U.S. market.

Ruling

Judge Edward J. Davila granted Oomph’s motion for default judgment. The court granted Oomph’s request for enhanced damages in the amount of $280,053.00, granted its request for $221,229.00 in attorneys’ fees, and granted its request for $17,686.70 in costs.

The court also granted a permanent injunction. The defendants, their officers, directors, employees, agents, subsidiaries, distributors, and persons acting with them were permanently barred from making, selling, advertising, distributing, or otherwise dealing in hair-volumizing iron products that infringe Patent No. 8,839,802; reproducing or distributing substantially similar or infringing copyrighted labels, packaging, manuals, instructions, or other materials; making unsupported claims of specified safety certifications; and knowingly helping others engage in those activities. Internet marketplaces and other service providers notified of the injunction were ordered to disable listings for infringing products.