The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation v. Shmavonian, 3:18-cv-06564

Plaintiff The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation sued defendant Gerald Shmavonian for trademark infringement and unfair competition for using plaintiff's marks to advertise rental of a Wright property for special events.
Defendant was served but did not respond; plaintiff moved for default judgment.
Plaintiff sought disgorgement of defendant's profits, attorneys' fees and costs, a permanent injunction, and an order against GoDaddy to remove defendant's website.
The court found the complaint established trademark infringement and unfair competition and that plaintiff was entitled to relief.
The court awarded defendant's profits of $36,000 (based on nine events at $4,000 each), attorneys' fees of $28,740 (after a 10% reduction for vague billing entries), costs of $1,307.50, and post-judgment interest; it declined to order relief against GoDaddy.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Liability for trademark infringement/unfair competition	Use of plaintiff's marks to advertise rentals caused infringement and unfair competition	No opposition filed	Complaint showed infringement/unfair competition; default judgment entered for plaintiff
Measure of disgorgement (defendant's profits)	Calculate gross profits by (# events) × (rental price); plaintiff estimated $209,920 but supported formula	No opposition/filed no evidence to rebut	Court accepted plaintiff's formula but found evidence supports $36,000 (9 events × $4,000) and awarded that amount
Award of attorneys' fees	Entitled to fees under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a); invoices support $31,933.34	No opposition	Court reviewed invoices, reduced fees by 10% for vague entries, awarded $28,740.00
Injunctive relief and third‑party relief against GoDaddy	Permanent injunction needed to stop future misuse; requested order requiring GoDaddy to remove site	No opposition from defendant; no briefing or service on GoDaddy	Court granted permanent injunction against defendant (broadly prohibiting use of Frank Lloyd Wright marks/domains) but declined to enjoin GoDaddy (no authority to bind non‑party)

Lindy Pen Co. v. Bic Pen Corp., 982 F.2d 1400 (9th Cir. 1993) (plaintiff must prove defendant's gross profits from infringing activity with reasonable certainty; once shown, profits are presumed attributable to infringement unless defendant rebuts)
Moreno v. City of Sacramento, 534 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2008) (district court may apply a modest percentage reduction to attorney fee lodestars for vague or insufficient billing descriptions)