Playboy Enterprises International, Inc. v. Playboy Enterprises, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedSeptember 29, 2023
Docket1:21-cv-06419
StatusUnknown

This text of Playboy Enterprises International, Inc. v. Playboy Enterprises, Inc. (Playboy Enterprises International, Inc. v. Playboy Enterprises, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Playboy Enterprises International, Inc. v. Playboy Enterprises, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK : PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES : INTERNATIONAL, INC., : 21-cv-6419 (AS) Plaintiff, : v. : JUDGMENT AND ORDER PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES, INC.; PLBY GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S : GROUP, INC.; JUNHAN HUANG, AKA JOHN MOTION FOR DEFAULT HUANG; MOUNTAIN CREST ACQUISITION : JUDGMENT AND CORP.; PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES (ASIA) RELATED RELIEF : LIMITED; WONG’S CAPITAL HOLDING GROUP LIMITED; PLAYBOY (CHINA) : BRAND MANAGEMENT CENTER; PLAYBOY TOBACCO GROUP LIMITED; : HUAHUA RABBIT (XIAMEN) HEALTH : SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD; HAIHAN FASHION (SHANGHAI) ENTERPRISES DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD.; BUNNIES OWNER GROUP; BUNNYGIRL CERTIFICATION INSTITUTE; BUNNY GIRL FOUNDATION, BUNNY GIRL UNION; BUNNY HUNTER, LLC; INTERNATIONAL MODEL CERTIFICATION ASSOCIATION; PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES INTERNATIONAL, INC.; PLEASURE INTERNATIONAL, CORP.; WONG’S BANK GROUP; WONG’S FOUNDATION; WONG’S INTERNATIONAL BANK; WONG’S SYNDICATE; WORLD FUTURE LEADER UNIVERSITY; WORLD INDUSTRIAL CAPITAL ORGANIZATION; FU MANHUA; MING CAI; LINGLING ZHANG; JOHN FU; E-MODE LIMITED; HUASE SPACE (FUJIAN) BRAND MANAGEMENT CO., LTD.; KING WONG; KAI MING LAI; FLOWER COLOR SPACE (FUJIAN) BRAND MANAGEMENT COMPANY LTD.; and FANCY SPACE (FUJIAN) BRAND MANAGEMENT CO. LTD. Defendants.

This matter having come before the Court on Plaintiff Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.’s (“Playboy”) Motion for Default Judgment and Related Relief, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 55 and 65; and this Court having reviewed the papers and proceedings in support of that Motion, including Playboy’s Amended Complaint, Memorandum of Law in support of the Motion, and the Declarations of Jennifer McCarthy and Maria R. Sinatra, along with

accompanying exhibits; and this Court being fully satisfied that the Defendants1 were properly served with summonses, the Amended Complaint, Dkt. 25, and all other pertinent papers and proceedings in this action, and failed to respond as required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12; and good cause being shown therefor; THE COURT HEREBY FINDS THAT: Jurisdiction and Venue 1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Playboy’s claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331

1 Defined as Playboy Enterprises, Inc.; PLBY Group, Inc.; Junhan Huang, aka John Huang; Mountain Crest Acquisition Corp., Playboy Enterprises (Asia) Limited; Wong’s Capital Holding Group Limited; Playboy (China) Brand Management Center; Playboy Tobacco Group Limited; Huahua Rabbit (Xiamen) Health Science and Technology Co., Ltd.; Haihan Fashion (Shanghai) Enterprises Development Co., Ltd., Bunnies Owner Group; Bunnygirl Certification Institute; Bunny Girl Foundation; Bunny Girl Union; Bunny Hunter LLC; International Model Certification Association; Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.; Pleasure International Corp.; Wong’s Bank Group; Wong’s Foundation; Wong’s International Bank; Wong’s Syndicate; World Future Leader University; World Industrial Capital Organization, Fu Manhua, Ming Cai, Lingling Zhang, John Fu, E-Mode Limited, HuaSe Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co., Ltd., King Wong, Kai Ming LAI, Flower Color Space (Fujian) Brand Management Company Ltd., and Fancy Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co. Ltd. 2 & 1338, and 15 U.S.C. § 1121. See Amended Complaint ¶¶ 15-17. 2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because: a. each Defendant has had continuous, systematic, and substantial contacts within New York, including doing business in New York and targeting consumers in New York, causing harm to Playboy’s business within this Judicial District, and

registering some of the Fraudulent Entities2 with the New York Secretary of State; b. The Defendants have created the Counterfeit Websites, which is accessible to consumers in New York and bears unauthorized copies of Playboy’s registered trademarks and copyrighted content. Each Defendant has targeted New York consumers by operating a fully interactive online website that is viewable by New York consumers; c. Defendants have sold services through the Counterfeit Websites to consumers within the United States, including upon information and belief to consumers within New York;

d. the Defendants are not independently managed, but are a group of interrelated entities that share common and identical ownership through Defendant Junhan Huang. Upon information and belief, the Defendants are financially dependent upon one another as they were created for the purpose of a single counterfeiting

2 Defined as Defendants Playboy Enterprises, Inc., PLBY Group, Inc., Bunnies Owner Group, Bunnygirl Certification Institute, Bunny Girl Foundation, Bunny Girl Union, Bunny Hunter LLC, International Model Certification Association, Mountain Crest Acquisition Corp., Playboy Enterprises International, Inc., Pleasure International Corp., Wong’s Bank Group, Wong’s Foundation, Wong’s International Bank, Wong’s Syndicate, World Future Leader University, and World Industrial Capital Organization. 3 scheme. Upon information and belief, the Defendants do not maintain independent corporate boards from one another, share email addresses, and market each other collectively through the use of forged documents; and e. Defendants have registered Fraudulent Entities in the state of New York, availing themselves of the privilege of conducting business in New York, and have

utilized instrumentalities located in New York and physical addresses located in this Judicial District to carry out the infringing and fraudulent acts of which Playboy complains. See Amended Complaint ¶¶ 18-22; Memorandum of Law in Support of Default Judgment (“Memo of Law”), at 2-3. 3. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because: a. A substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to Playboy’s claims has occurred in this Judicial District because Defendants have registered some of the Fraudulent Entities in the State of New York with the New York Secretary of

State utilizing addresses within this Judicial District, and because a substantial part of the harm caused by Defendants has occurred in this Judicial District. Through the Defendants’ Fraudulent Entities with addresses listed in this Judicial District, Defendants have been able to perpetuate the acts complained of herein. See Amended Complaint ¶ 23. 2. The Complaint pleads sufficient facts and states claims against Defendants for: a. Trademark counterfeiting, unfair competition, and false designation of origin, in violation of the Lanham Act, Sections 32 and 43(a) (15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125(a) (Counts I and III) (Memo of Law at 12-15);

4 b. Copyright infringement in violation of the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.) (Count II) (Memo of Law at 14-15); and c. Trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation of New York common law (Count IV) (Memo of Law at 13-14). 3. The Court finds that Playboy has provided sufficient facts demonstrating that

Defendants’ conduct in this action was undertaken willfully, particularly in light of the multiple forged documents created by the Defendants in an effort to appear that they are Playboy, or are authorized to act on behalf of Playboy when they are not (Amended Complaint ¶¶ 182-266; Memo of Law at 15-16). 4.

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

Related

United States v. Carignan
286 F. Supp. 284 (D. Massachusetts, 1967)
GUCCI AMERICA, INC. v. Tyrrell-Miller
678 F. Supp. 2d 117 (S.D. New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Playboy Enterprises International, Inc. v. Playboy Enterprises, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/playboy-enterprises-international-inc-v-playboy-enterprises-inc-nysd-2023.