On June 24, 2009, I issued an order pointing out that, although their time to do so hadexpired, defendants had failed to file any opposition to plaintiff’s motion. The order alerteddefendants that I would consider plaintiff’s motion unopposed, and the relief sought byplaintiff conceded, if defendants failed to submit their opposition by June 30, 2009.Nevertheless, defendants, although they have appeared in this action through counsel, havefailed to file any opposition to plaintiff’s motion, seek an extension of time to do so, orotherwise communicate with the court. Accordingly, I conclude that defendants have concededplaintiff’s right to the relief sought in its motion.
I. Statutory Damages
Motorola seeks an award of statutory damages in the minimum amount of $1,500,000 upto a maximum of $16,000,000 for defendants’ willful violation of the Lanham Act. Pl. Mem. 2.
A party electing to recover statutory damages may recover from $1,000 to $200,000 percounterfeit mark per type of goods sold. A plaintiff in a trademark infringement case may elect to recover either actual or statutorydamages. 15 U.S.C. § 1117. The Lanham Act permits recovery of statutory damages because“counterfeiters’ records are frequently nonexistent, inadequate, or deceptively kept . . ., makingproving actual damages in these cases extremely difficult if not impossible.”
Rodgers v. Anderson
, 2005 WL 950021, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 26, 2005) (internal citations omitted).
“Pl. Mem.” refers to plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for JudgmentPursuant to FRCP 54(b), Docket Entry 49.
15 U.S.C. § 1117(c)(1). A maximum of $2,000,000 per
In 2008, Congress increased the amounts recoverable as statutory damages. The prior version providedthat a court could award $500 to $100,000 per violation and a maximum of $1,000,000 per violation in
Case 1:07-cv-03963-CPS-SMG Document 52 Filed 08/05/09 Page 3 of 15