Klauber Brothers, Inc. v. The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc.
557 F. App'x 77
2d Cir.2014Background
- Klauber, co-author of lace designs 7087 and 7088, alleges Bon-Ton infringed with a lace waistband design.
- Bon-Ton advertised and sold underwear whose lace waistband allegedly copies Klauber’s designs.
- District Court dismissed Klauber’s copyright infringement claim (and others) against Bon-Ton.
- Klauber appealed, challenging the dismissal as to copyright infringement.
- Russell-Newman, Inc. was named but never served or appeared; district court did not dismiss claims against Russell.
- Appellate court discusses jurisdiction under Leonhard and analyzes merits de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal is jurisdictionally proper despite an unserved defendant | Klauber seeks review of all claims incl. against Russell | Leonhard bars review when unserved defendant remains | Jurisdiction exists; Leonhard rule applies to unserved Russell |
| Whether Bon-Ton’s design constitutes substantial similarity to Klauber’s copyrighted designs | Designs are substantially similar in elements and overall feel | Differences outweigh similarities; not substantially similar | No substantial similarity; district court’s holding affirmed |
| Whether the district court properly evaluated substantial similarity on a motion to dismiss | Court should view allegations as true and assess similarity | Court can decide substantial similarity at motion to dismiss when obvious | Court appropriately resolved substantial similarity on a motion to dismiss as a matter of law |
Key Cases Cited
- Leonhard v. United States, 633 F.2d 599 (2d Cir. 1980) (final judgment rule; unserved defendants may not bar appeal)
- Peter F. Gaito Architecture, LLC v. Simone Development Corp., 602 F.3d 57 (2d Cir. 2010) (substantial similarity standard; district court can decide if no reasonable jury would find similarity)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court 2009) (pleading standards; plausibility in complaint review)
- Brown v. N.Y. State Supreme Court for Second Judicial Dist., 372 F. App’x 183 (2d Cir. 2010) (exception to Leonhard rule discussed; not applicable here)