fbpx
Wednesday, 11 August 2021 18:47

SATA’s Fight Against Knockoffs and Counterfeits

Index

...ordered the infringing products directly from AUARITA.

 

“The clear evidence of active solicitation of United States customers was the straw that broke the camel's back,” he said. “Now we were on the hunt once again.”

 

First, SATA had to identify the extent of the infringement of their intellectual property. They identified more than 15 different trademark infringements and more than 15 different design patent infringements by ITALCO branded products---more than 30 infringements total.

 

Next, SATA entrusted their attorney with the complaint against ITALCO as well as AUARITA. To bring the suit, SATA had to serve the summons at ITALCO’s official U.S. address. AUARITA (or ITALCO) was proving to be elusive as the addresses listed were fake.

 

In response, SATA’s lawyer filed a motion to serve AUARITA via email. The court allowed it.

 

“After the complaint was served, ITALCO/AUARITA buried its head in the sand and did not defend itself. That showed us the company knew that it is a waste of money to defend in this clear case of willful infringement and counterfeiting,” he said.

 

In the end, SATA received a judgement of more than $10 million in damages. They got a refund of their attorney fees and a permanent injunction prohibiting either ITALCO or AUARITA to offer, sell or advertise the infringing products. Additionally, they were successful in shutting down the website until the infringing products were removed.

 

“Now what about the money?” said the representative. “Of course, it is difficult to get the payments from a Chinese company without assets in the U.S., but due to the judgement it will impossible for ITALCO, respectively AUARITA, to do business in the U.S. As soon as they have assets in the U.S., we will be able to seize these assets.”

 

Is this the end of the fight against ITALCO/AUARITA? No, as SATA has...