One Hanover, LLC v. Highgate Hotels, Inc.
- Figueredo
- 1:22-cv-02723
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In One Hanover v. Witkoff Group, Judge Figueredo ordered defendants to respond by December 2, 2022, to One Hanover’s discovery-enforcement letter.
The order affected One Hanover, LLC and the defendants in the trademark case by setting a deadline for the defendants to respond to One Hanover’s discovery-enforcement letter. The provided text does not show a final ruling on the requested discovery relief or sanctions.
What happened
One Hanover, LLC v. Witkoff Group, LLC involved a trademark dispute over defendants’ alleged unauthorized use of the HARRY’S mark in a website address and subdomain. One Hanover said defendants had not complied with an earlier order requiring production of documents about when the subdomain and website became available and who arranged for the subdomain’s addition.
One Hanover asked the court to require defendants to search relevant custodians and sources, identify the search terms used, provide overdue initial disclosures, and allow One Hanover to seek an order preventing defendants from contesting part of the case. One Hanover said defendants had conducted no search and had provided only an email stating that no responsive documents existed.
Judge Valerie Figueredo ordered that any response to One Hanover’s letter motion was due December 2, 2022. The text provided does not show a ruling on One Hanover’s request to preclude defendants from opposing part of its allegations.
The detailed version
- One Hanover, LLC v. Highgate Hotels, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-02723
- Figueredo
- Nov. 28, 2022
Background
The matter concerns discovery in a trademark case. One Hanover alleged that defendants used the registered HARRY’S mark without authorization in various media, including an internet address containing a subdomain. The discovery dispute concerned documents about the date the subdomain was added to the domain, communications concerning that addition, and the date the website first became visible to users who entered the relevant address into a web browser.
According to One Hanover’s letter, the court had previously granted One Hanover’s request to compel production of those documents and had set October 28, 2022, as the production deadline. One Hanover said the documents had not been produced by that date. It also said defendants initially did not respond to follow-up messages, later stated that there were no responsive documents, and acknowledged during a November 21 meet-and-confer that they had not searched any custodians or sources for the requested communications.
Requests in the Letter
One Hanover asked the court to endorse December 2, 2022, as the deadline for defendants to provide overdue initial disclosures. It also asked the court to remind defendants that discovery responses must comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(g), including by identifying the sources, custodians, and search terms used. In the alternative, One Hanover asked for permission to file a motion seeking to prevent defendants from contesting at least part of One Hanover’s allegations based on the alleged failure to comply with the discovery order.
Court’s Action
Judge Valerie Figueredo ordered that any response to the letter motion was due by Friday, December 2, 2022. The provided text does not state that the court granted or denied One Hanover’s request for permission to seek preclusion, nor does it impose a discovery sanction. The order shown is therefore limited to setting a response deadline.
Note on the Provided Case Name
The supplied case name identifies the defendant as Highgate Hotels, Inc., but the opinion text’s caption identifies the defendants as Witkoff Group, LLC, et al. This summary follows the caption appearing in the opinion text.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.