[ruby-core:65592] [ruby-trunk - Bug #10359] [Open] UGG 1000779 W's Stellah Denim Black ugg1179

Issue #10359 has been reported by 张 nike.

----------------------------------------
Bug #10359: UGG 1000779 W's Stellah Denim Black ugg1179
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10359

* Author: 张 nike
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Category: 
* Target version: 
* ruby -v: ugg boots,ugg australia,ugg outlet,cheap uggs
* Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------





 Read More What's hot and what's not in fashion stocks So how has UGG-once regarded by Wall Street as just another fad-managed to keep its brand relevant among a fickle consumer basee Angel Martinez, CEO of UGG's parent company Deckers (DECK), told CNBC it doesn't come down to chasing the latest trend. Instead, it's about focusing on comfort.[[http://www.2014bootscoralpink.com]] We're not in the fashion business, per se," Martinez said in UGG's backstage lounge at New York Fashion Week. "Fashion's a component of our business but in this show here, people live and die by fashion... 

All of our brands deliver a functional benefit and that makes a huge difference." The results are paying off, with company's shares rising more than 50 percent over the past year. After establishing a following for its slipper and basic boot businesses, UGG has evolved into a lifestyle brand that now includes sheepskin rugs, loungewear and handbags. It's tapped into the tween set with its I Heart UGG test line, which offers a more accessible price point between $80 and $200. And after signing NFL quarterback Tom Brady to represent the company's men's product in 2010, the category's sales have risen 140 percent to account for 15 percent of the business-a number Martinez thinks could rise to 20 percent. 

Although at first some men were "poo-pooing" the idea of UGG being a men's brand, Brady's role-as well as women who bought men's slippers for their significant others-jumpstarted sales. "We kind of signed Tom Brady to say, 'If it's OK for Tom, it's probably OK for you,' " Martinez said.IT’S safe to say these bedazzled ugg boots beat the usual tatty pairs laying around the house.Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation ("Plaintiff") alleged that Defendants Superstar International, Inc. and Sai Liu ("Defendants") produce, advertise, and sell products that infringe Plaintiff's design patents for UGG boots.

 The district court previously ruled that default judgment was appropriate, considering both the procedural requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) and the factors laid out in Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986).[[http://www.2014bootscoralpink.com/uggs-for-infants-c-36.html]] In the previous order, the district court left open what relief Plaintiff could recover. The district court then addressed whether the Plaintiff should be entitled to treble damages. As explained by the district court, "[u]nder 35 U.S.C. § 284 ("Section 284"), when a Court finds that a patent has been infringed, 'the court shall award the claimant damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court.'

 One way damages may be measured under Section 284 is by the patentee's lost profits. Lucent Technologies, Inc. v. Gateway, Inc.,580 F.3d 1301, 1324 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The burden of proving damages is on the patentee. Id." Here, the district court noted that "Plaintiff discovered the sale of the infringing products after its investigators bought twelve pairs of infringing boots from defendant Superstar International. (Declaration of Leah Evert-Burks, Dkt. No. 42-2, e 4.) Plaintiff's lost profits from the sale of those twelve pairs of infringing boots is approximately $1,584.00. (Id. e 6.) Because Plaintiff was unable to get discovery from Defendants, this is the only information Plaintiff has about the extent of Defendants' infringing activities.

 Addressing the issue of treble damages, the district court stated that Section 284 allows a court to "increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed." "Section 284 does not give criteria for when damages should be increased, but the Federal Circuit has stated that '[b]ecause increased damages are punitive, the requisite conduct for imposing them must include some degree of culpability.' Jurgens v. CBK, Ltd., 80 F.3d 1566, 1570 (Fed. Cir. 1996). An act of wilful infringement satisfies this culpability requirement. Id. If a Court finds culpable conduct, the Court 'then determines, exercising its sound discretion, whether, and to what extent, to increase the damages award given the totality of the circumstances.' Id." 
![http://www.2014bootscoralpink.com](http://www.2014bootscoralpink.com/images/2014bootscoralpink/UGG-5825-Classic-Short-Boots-Grey-Purple-Green-ugg1351_3.jpg)
The district court then concluded that the Plaintiff alleged that Defendants advertised and sold the infringing boots "knowingly and intentionally" and that this conduct "constitute[d] willful acts and intentional infringement." (Complaint ee 20, 24.) These allegations are accepted as true on default.Derek Andrew, Inc. v. Poof Apparel Corp., 528 F.3d 696, 702 (9th Cir. 2008) As a result, the district court analyzed whether this conduct, including the failure to participate in discovery, justified the increase in the damage award. "Since the Court has found culpable conduct from wilful infringement, the Court turns to whether to increase the damages award given the totality of the circumstances.

 In considering the totality of the circumstances here, the Court considers Defendants' conduct throughout this litigation. Although Defendants filed an answer in this case, they then completely failed to participate in discovery. [[http://www.2014bootscoralpink.com/classic-c-1_24.html]] Magistrate Judge Walsh granted two motions to compel (Dkt. Nos. 19, 20) and ordered Defendants to pay $1,750 in sanctions. (Dkt. No. 24.) When Defendants didn't pay the sanctions or respond to the discovery, Plaintiff asked for an order requiring Defendants to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of Judge Walsh's discovery order. 





-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/