Great Bowery, Inc., d/b/a Trunk Archive v. Royal Beauty Studio Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York·Decided April 16, 2026·No. 1:25-cv-03627·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

GREAT BOWERY, Inc., d/b/a TRUNK ARCHIVE,

Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Case No. 25-CV-3627 (FB) (JAM) -against-

ROYAL BEAUTY STUDIO INC.,

Defendant.

Appearance:

For the Plaintiff: TARYN ROSE MURAY The Law Firm of Higbee and Associates 3110 W Cheyenne Ave Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89032 BLOCK, Senior District Judge: On February 23, 2026, Magistrate Judge Marutollo issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that Great Bowery Inc.’s (“Great Bowery”) motion for default judgement be granted, Defendant be permanently enjoined from infringing on Great Bowery’s copyright, and Great Bowery be awarded $10,000 for statutory damages, $2,323.75 for attorney’s fees, $946.80 in costs, and post-judgment interest. See ECF No. 22. The R&R recited that “[a]ny objections to this Report and Recommendation must be filed within aftrer service,” and that “failure to object timely to a [magistrate judge]’s report operates as a waiver of any further judicial review of the [magistrate judge]’s decision.” R&R at 41. On February 25th, Great Bowery’s counsel served copies of the R&R on Defendant, making objections due by March 11th. See ECF No. 23. To date, no objections have been filed. If clear notice has been given of the consequences of failure to object, and there are no objections, the Court may adopt the R&R without de novo review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); Mario v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) (“Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences, failure timely to object to a magistrate’s report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate’s

decision.”). The Court will excuse the failure to object, however, and conduct de novo review if it appears that the magistrate judge may have committed plain error. See Spence v. Superintendent, Great Meadow Corr. Facility, 219 F.3d 162, 174 (2d Cir. 2000). The R&R contains no error, let alone plain error. Accordingly, the Court adopts it without de novo review. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Great Bowery and against Royal Beauty Studio, Inc., in the total amount of $13,270.55. Defendant will also be required to pay post-judgement interest at the current legal rate allowed and accruing under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a), from the date of entry of judgement until Defendant has satisfied the judgement. SO ORDERED.

_/S/ Frederic Block____________ FREDERIC BLOCK Senior United States District Judge Brooklyn, New York April 16, 2026

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Great Bowery, Inc., d/b/a Trunk Archive v. Royal Beauty Studio Inc., (E.D.N.Y. 2026).

Great Bowery, Inc., d/b/a Trunk Archive v. Royal Beauty Studio Inc. (Great Bowery, Inc., d/b/a Trunk Archive v. Royal Beauty Studio Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related