GMA Accessories, Inc. v. HMY Jewelry, Inc.

Background

GMA brought a case alleging that HMY infringed GMA’s copyrights and trade dress in fabric designs and packaging for face masks. In a letter to the court, GMA’s counsel said GMA had invested resources in developing original packaging and artwork and alleged that HMY copied those materials and sold the same type of product. These statements are GMA’s allegations; this order does not decide whether they are true.

Requested discovery

GMA asked the court to require limited discovery before GMA sought a preliminary injunction. The requested materials included sales orders and invoices, supplier and purchaser information, and records concerning the design or copying of artwork. GMA relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d), which can allow discovery before the usual schedule when the court permits it. GMA argued that early discovery would help determine whether an injunction was needed to preserve the existing situation and would show the scope of the alleged infringement.

GMA also represented that HMY had said through counsel on January 7, 2021, that it was no longer selling items bearing the referenced designs. GMA said that a later visit to Ross Stores showed additional HMY products available for purchase and asserted that HMY might still be supplying allegedly infringing merchandise. The opinion text does not include HMY’s substantive response to the letter motion.

Order

The court ordered HMY to respond to GMA’s letter motion by January 29, 2021. It also ordered GMA to serve a copy of the order on HMY within one business day. The order did not grant or deny the requested discovery, decide whether GMA was likely to succeed on its copyright or trade-dress claims, or rule on a preliminary injunction. Judge John P. Cronan signed the order on January 22, 2021.