Jury Awards Plaintiff $3 Million for Design Patent Infringement, Trade Dress Infringement, False Advertising, and Unfair Competition. 

Perry J. Saidman

In Gavrieli Brands, LLC v. Soto Massini (USA) Corporation, a jury in the federal district court of Delaware found for the plaintiff/patentee on all counts. The court handed down a Judgment reflecting same on May 13, 2019.

Attached are the 4 infringed design patents, and a document showing the plaintiff’s TIEKS product, and the defendant’s infringing “Orthera Baildrina” products (rebranded at the “Soto Massini’s Terzetto Milano” shoe).  Also shown are comparisons between the plaintiff’s patents and the accused designs.

The case is unremarkable but for the jury throwing the book at the defendant, the defendant’s relying on the point of novelty test for design patent infringement (despite its abolition in Egyptian Goddess), and the defendant’s failure to file a motion for summary judgment of invalidity and/or non-infringement. Courts generally favor such motions because they can save the court the trouble of presiding over a potentially lengthy jury trial.