`
`UNITED STATES DISTRJCT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRJCT OF NEW YORK
`----------------------------------------------X
`FOCUS PRODUCTS GROUP INTERNATIONAL, LLC,
`et al.,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`-v-
`
`KARTRJ SALES COMPANY, INC., et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`-------------------------------------------------------------X
`PAUL A. ENGELMA YER, District Judge:
`
`15 Civ. 10154 (PAE)
`
`ORDER
`
`The Court has reviewed the recent exchange of letters between plaintiffs Focus Products
`
`Group, International, LLC, et al. ("Focus") and defendant Kartri Sales Company, Inc. ("Kartri")
`
`regarding whether a curtain product purportedly sold by Kartri-which the parties refer to as
`
`"Hang2it"-violates the court-ordered injunction entered after trial. See Dkt. 519 (Focus letter);
`
`Dkt. 521 (Kartri response); Dkt. 522, 526 (Focus replies). The Court's assessment is as follows:
`
`1.
`
`Focus has not waived this claim and is not precluded from pursuing it. In its
`
`opening letter, Focus claimed that Kartri, in its informal communications, has asserted that Focus
`
`had waived this claim by not pursuing in at trial. Dkt. 519 at 1-2. Kartri counters that it was
`
`misunderstood and that it does not claim waiver. Dkt. 521.
`
`Regardless of whether Kartri at some point made such an assertion, Focus-substantially
`
`for the reasons its letter articulates-has not waived its right to challenge Hang2it, whether as a
`
`violation of the Court's post-trial injunction, as Focus proposes, or on other grounds. As Focus
`
`recounts, the Court ruled that Hang2it, having been introduced long after the outset of this case,
`
`was not a subject of discove1y, and therefore was not properly within the scope of the trial. Dkt.
`
`
`
`Case 1:15-cv-10154-PAE Document 529 Filed 03/02/23 Page 2 of 3
`
`519 at 1-2 (citations omitted). That ruling does not prohibit Focus from contending either that
`
`Kartri, effective upon the issuance of the Court's post-trial injunction, has violated that
`
`injunction by marketing Hang2it, or that Kartri's actions in connection with Hang2it at any
`
`time-whether before, during or after trial-have violated Focus's rights.
`
`2.
`
`Focus's challenges based on Hang2it are properly brought in a new lawsuit.
`
`The instant lawsuit has been structured around specific products manufactured or
`
`marketed by Kartri and its co-defendant Marquis Mills, Int' 1, Inc. Extensive discovery was taken
`
`about those products. This discove1y-testimonial, documentary, and expert-formed a
`
`significant part of the evidence at trial.
`
`Depending on the nature, formulation, and scope of Focus's claim(s) against Kartri with
`
`respect to the Hang2it product, it is possible that discove1y will need to be taken with respect to
`
`that product. And although Focus's proposal to center its case on the claim of a violation of the
`
`Court's post-trial injunction has the potential significantly to streamline the necessary discovery,
`
`some discovery about Hang2it may prove necessary to resolve even that claim, whether as to
`
`liability, damages, or both.
`
`The Court's judgment is that it is prudent and right that Focus pursue its challenge to
`
`Hang2it in a separate action. Such will enable the instant case, which dates to 2015, to be closed,
`
`upon resolution of the outstanding fee issues, without the risk of delay attendant to litigation over
`
`Hang2it. It will also assure that Focus's claim( s) as to Hang2it are litigated with the formalities
`
`and rigor attendant to a plenary lawsuit. That said, the Court expects that-in light ofKartri's
`
`history of willful infringement as established in this case and in light of the substantial showing
`
`that Focus has previewed with its claim that Kartri's marketing ofHang2it infringes the Court's
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:15-cv-10154-PAE Document 529 Filed 03/02/23 Page 3 of 3
`
`injunction-Focus's claims would be litigated on an expedited, and potentially highly expedited,
`
`basis.
`
`The Court accordingly declines to consider Focus's claims as to Hang2it in the context of
`
`the instant litigation.
`
`Separately, the Court was pleased to note the appearance of new counsel for Kartri. The
`
`Court strongly encourages new counsel to examine Kartri' s legal position with the expected rigor
`
`and neutrality, mindful of the history of this litigation, in which Kartri has been found to have
`
`undertaken infringing actions willfully, either without, or without heeding, sage guidance from
`
`seasoned counsel. The Court is hopeful that new counsel's entry will steer Kartri away from
`
`future infringing actions.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: March 2, 2023
`New York, New York
`
`Paul A. Engelmayer
`United States District Judge
`
`3
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
