Liangsword Limited v. The Partnerships, Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
0:24-cv-60618
| S.D. Fla. | Sep 17, 2024Background
- Plaintiff Liangsword Limited alleges multiple defendants, including several "Joybuy" entities, infringed on its FACEGA trademark through sales on e-commerce platforms.
- Plaintiff was allowed to effect alternative service by email and website posting due to incomplete or false contact information from defendants.
- After the defendants failed to respond, Plaintiff secured a Clerk’s default and subsequently moved for default judgment against the Joybuy Defendants.
- The Joybuy Defendants later appeared, moved to vacate the Clerk's default under Rule 55(c), and sought more time to respond to the complaint, citing lack of local counsel as the reason for delay.
- Plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing service was adequate, defendants were aware of the litigation, and asserted the Joybuy Defendants lacked meritorious defenses.
- The Court found the Joybuy Defendants' motion conclusory and unsupported, denying their motion to vacate default.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether good cause exists to vacate default | Defendants were properly served, aware of suit, and nonresponsive | Could not secure IP-literate counsel in time; service was questionable | No good cause shown; motion denied |
| Was service of process proper | Service was Court-approved and confirmed | Service was legally questionable; may lack personal jurisdiction | Service not shown insufficient; defendants confused standards |
| Existence of a meritorious defense | Defendants offered only conclusory, unsupported defenses | Asserted non-infringement and questionable service | No plausibly stated meritorious defense; insufficient showing |
| Prejudice to Plaintiff if default set aside | Delay was due to defendants' inaction, not recent case filing | No significant prejudice due to short time since default | Factor neutral; delay not prejudicial but not dispositive |
Key Cases Cited
- Compania Interamericana Exp.-Imp., S.A. v. Compania Dominicana de Aviacion, 88 F.3d 948 (11th Cir. 1996) (sets forth standards for vacating defaults and defines willful default)
- Fla. Physician's Ins. Co. v. Ehlers, 8 F.3d 780 (11th Cir. 1993) (defaults are disfavored; preference for adjudication on the merits)
- Thomas v. Brown, [citation="504 F. App'x 845"] (11th Cir. 2013) (distinguishes personal jurisdiction from service of process in default context)