Global Brand Holdings, LLC v. Accessories Direct International USA, Inc.
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:17-cv-07137
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Global Brand Holdings v. Accessories Direct, Judge Cave ordered an explanation for missed damages filings and warned damages could be recommended without a hearing.
Accessories Direct International USA, Inc. was required to explain its missed deadline and could lose the opportunity for an in-court damages hearing if it did not respond or request one by December 23, 2019. Global Brand Holdings, LLC’s written damages submissions could be considered without a hearing.
What happened
Global Brand Holdings, LLC asked the court to consider its proposed findings about damages in its case against Accessories Direct International USA, Inc.
The defendant had received an extension and was ordered to respond by December 16, 2019, but did not comply. The order required the defendant to explain why by December 23, 2019.
Judge Sarah L. Cave warned that, if the defendant did not respond or request an in-court hearing by December 23, she intended to issue a report and recommendation about damages using only the plaintiff’s written submissions.
The detailed version
- Global Brand Holdings, LLC v. Accessories Direct International USA, Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-07137
- Lewis Kaplan
- Dec. 17, 2019
Background
The parties requested more time for Accessories Direct International USA, Inc. to respond to Global Brand Holdings, LLC’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning damages. The court ordered the defendant to respond by December 16, 2019. The order states that the defendant did not comply.
Order
The court directed the defendant to file a letter explaining its failure to comply by Monday, December 23, 2019. It also warned that if the defendant failed either to respond to the plaintiff’s submissions or to contact the judge’s chambers by that date to request an in-court hearing, the court intended to issue a report and recommendation concerning damages based only on the plaintiff’s written submissions and without an in-court hearing. The order cited Second Circuit authority stating that a damages hearing is not required if the court ensures there is a basis for the damages specified in a default judgment.
Effect
This order set a deadline and described a possible next step; it did not itself determine the amount of damages. Judge Sarah L. Cave issued the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.