3 BEES & ME INC. v. Besportble

Background

3 Bees & Me, Inc. sued Besportble, Cyfie, and other named defendants under 35 U.S.C. § 271 for infringement of United States Patent No. D 884,087 S, called the “’087 Patent.” The patent covers a design for an apparatus that fastens bathtub toys, such as toy basketball hoops, to bathtub fixtures. The plaintiff stated that it owned the patent by assignment and had sold bathtub basketball toys using the patented design.

The order focused on Defendant Cyfie. The court had allowed service by electronic means, and the plaintiff served Cyfie by email. Cyfie did not answer or otherwise respond within the time allowed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12. The Clerk issued a certificate of default. The plaintiff then served Cyfie with its motion for default judgment and a permanent injunction, but Cyfie did not respond or attend hearings concerning the motion.

Court’s Findings

The court found that the ’087 Patent was valid and enforceable. It also found that Cyfie had manufactured, imported, exported, advertised, marketed, promoted, distributed, displayed, and sold through Amazon storefronts bathtub toys that infringed the patent. The court concluded that the accused products and the patented design were “substantially the same,” meaning that an ordinary observer familiar with earlier designs would be deceived into believing that the accused product was the patented design.

The court found personal jurisdiction over Cyfie under New York Civil Practice Law and Rules § 302(a)(1) because Cyfie operated an Amazon storefront through which customers in New York could, and had, purchased the infringing products. It further found that the infringement threatened immediate and irreparable harm, including unrecoverable lost revenue, lost market share, price erosion, reputational harm, and lost marketing opportunities. The court found that the balance of potential harm and the public interest favored a permanent injunction.

Ruling

The court granted the plaintiff’s application for a default judgment and permanent injunction. It entered a judgment of patent infringement in favor of the plaintiff and against Cyfie based on Cyfie’s importing, marketing, selling, and offering for sale of products that infringed the ’087 Patent.

The permanent injunction restrained and enjoined Cyfie from manufacturing, importing, exporting, advertising, marketing, promoting, distributing, displaying, offering for sale, selling, or otherwise dealing in the infringing products. It also prohibited Cyfie from concealing, destroying, transferring, or disposing of infringing products or related records; creating or using new entities, accounts, storefronts, or other means to evade the order; and knowingly instructing, aiding, or encouraging others to engage in those activities. People acting in active concert or participation with Cyfie who received actual notice of the order were also covered by the restraints described in the order.

The order required the plaintiff to serve the permanent injunction electronically on Cyfie within ten days after the court entered it and to serve Amazon.com by Federal Express and email.