Jordan v. Golden Bridge Books

Background

Portia Hartencia Jordan alleged that she owns the copyright in Herbal Medicines and Home Remedies: A Potpourri in Bahamian Culture. She claimed that Golden Bridge Books had sold illegally copied versions of the book through online platforms since 2004. Jordan alleged that she had purchased two copies that were labeled as used but appeared to be new, unauthorized copies.

Jordan sued for copyright infringement, unfair competition, and violation of section 1202(b) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. She also sought emergency injunctive relief, but the court previously denied her request for a temporary restraining order because she had not adequately shown a likelihood of success or irreparable harm. Golden Bridge sent emails to the court but did not formally appear through counsel, as required for a corporate entity.

Jordan obtained a certificate of default and moved for default judgment. She requested judgment on all three claims, a permanent injunction, $100,000 in statutory damages, $23,013 in attorneys’ fees, $620 in costs, and an order restraining Golden Bridge’s accounts and transferring withheld assets.

Legal Standard

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55, entry of default recognizes a defendant’s failure to defend, but default judgment requires the court to determine whether the complaint’s well-pleaded facts establish legal liability. A default does not automatically establish that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment, damages, or other relief. The court must accept well-pleaded factual allegations as true, except allegations concerning damages, and must still determine whether those facts satisfy the applicable legal standard.

Court’s Analysis

The court first held that it could exercise personal jurisdiction over Golden Bridge. Jordan alleged that Golden Bridge conducted significant business in New York by marketing to New York residents and offering the book for sale there. The court also found that service of process established jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(k).

The court nevertheless concluded that the complaint failed to establish liability on all three claims. For copyright infringement, Jordan adequately alleged ownership of a valid copyright. But she did not provide sufficient factual allegations showing that Golden Bridge had sold unauthorized copies. The fact that two copies looked new, combined with the book’s limited distribution, did not non-speculatively establish that the copies were counterfeit. The court noted that the allegations also supported a lawful alternative explanation: Golden Bridge may have resold genuine copies that had previously been legally purchased.

The court found that Golden Bridge’s alleged efforts to avoid service did not cure the lack of factual support. It also found that the unfair-competition claim did not plausibly allege bad-faith misappropriation, and that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act claim lacked factual allegations that Golden Bridge intentionally removed or altered copyright-management information while knowing of that conduct.

Disposition

The court declined to enter default judgment on liability for any of the three claims. It therefore did not address Jordan’s requests for damages or injunctive relief. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer denied the motion for default judgment without prejudice and directed the clerk to terminate the motion. The case remained open, and Jordan was permitted to pursue discovery and was directed to inform the court whether she intended to continue the case.