United States District Court, D. Nevada
S. Wang J. Andrew Coombs, Of Counsel Wang Law Corporation
James D. Boyle Holley Driggs Walch Fine Wray Puzey &
Thompson Attorneys for Plaintiffs Seiko Epson Corporation and
Epson America, Inc.
JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO ENTRY OF DEFAULT
cause having come before this Court on the motion of
Plaintiffs Seiko Epson Corporation and Epson America, Inc.
(collectively “Plaintiffs”) for entry of default
judgment and permanent injunction (“Motion”)
against Defendants Inksystem LLC, Lucky Print, LLC, AF LLC,
ART LLC, Inkredible LLC LLC, Andriy Kravchuk, Igor Bielov,
Artem Koshkalda, Vitalii Maliuk, Veles LLC, Alado LLC, Karine
LLC, KBF, LLC, Karine Vardanian a/k/a Karine Christ a/k/a
Karine Crist a/k/a Karine Westbrook, Vladimir Slobodianiuk
a/k/a Volodymyr Slobodianiuk a/k/a Vladimir Westbrook,
Kristina Antonova a/k/a Krystyna Antonova a/k/a Kristy
Antonova a/k/a Krystyna Antanova a/k/a Krystyna Taryanik, and
Roman Taryanik (collectively, “Defendants”), and
Sancase LLC, Vilacet LLC, Renoca LLC, Best Deal Cartridge,
LLC, Privat Group LLC, Yava LLC and Danalop LLC
(collectively, “Koshkalda's Companies”);
the Court having read and considered the pleadings,
declarations and exhibits on file in this matter and having
reviewed such evidence as was presented in support of
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, the Court finds the following
Plaintiffs are the owners of all rights in and to trademark
registrations, including, but not limited to, the trademarks
which are the subject of the registrations listed in Exhibit
A (collectively the “Plaintiffs'
Trademarks”), attached hereto.
Plaintiffs have complied in all respects with the laws
governing trademarks and secured the exclusive rights and
privileges in and to the Plaintiffs' Trademarks.
appearance and other qualities of the Plaintiffs'
Trademarks are distinctive and original.
are using Plaintiffs' Trademarks or marks confusingly
similar to Plaintiffs' Trademarks, in connection with the
importation, manufacture, distribution, sale and offer for
sale of counterfeit and/or infringing ink cartridges bearing
unauthorized reproductions or substantially similar copies of
registered trademarks owned by Plaintiffs
advertising, displaying, promoting, marketing, distributing,
offering for sale and selling of the Unauthorized Product was
engaged in willfully and intentionally, without leave or
license from Plaintiffs, in violation of Plaintiffs'
rights in and to Plaintiffs' Trademarks.
liability of the Defendants in the above-referenced action
for their acts in violation of Plaintiffs' rights is
knowing and willful, and as such the Court expressly finds
that there is no just reason for delay in entering the
default judgment and permanent injunction sought herein.
Court has previously found that Plaintiffs have shown that
proceeds from Defendants' infringement were deposited
into a large number of bank accounts and also used to
purchase valuable real estate, among other things. Dkt. 159.
Court has also found that Plaintiffs have shown that
Defendants have and are likely to further liquidate and
dissipate assets, that they have a history of transferring
money to family members and using shell companies to hide
assets or the source of money. Dkt. 159.
Court, as a result of Defendants' dissipation, secreting,
and hiding of assets and other bad faith acts, granted an
Order for Asset Seizure and Impoundment against Defendants AF
LLC, ART LLC, Inkredible LLC LLC, Andriy Kravchuk, Igor
Bielov, Artem Koshkalda and Vitalii Maliuk on August 22, 2017
(“Asset Freeze Order”), enjoining them and any
person, corporation or other entity acting in concert with
them, from further transfer or other concealment of assets.
Dkt. 159. After Defendant Koshkalda, with the assistance of
co-Defendant Vladimir Westbrook, continued to act in
violation of the Court's Asset Freeze Order,
individually, and through various shell companies, including
but not limited to Sancase LLC, Vilacet LLC and Renoca LLC,
the Court set a hearing requiring the personal appearance of
both Koshkalda and Westbrook regarding their alleged
contempt, but they failed to appear in violation of the
Court's Order and were found in contempt of Court. Dkt.
250 (“Contempt Order”). As a result of
Koshkalda's continued and undisputed violation of Court
Orders, including of the Asset Freeze Order, an Amended Asset
Freeze Order was issued as against Koshkalda and his
companies as a direct result of his latest contempt.
based upon the foregoing facts, and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING
THEREFOR, THE COURT ORDERS that this Judgment shall be and is
hereby entered in the within action as follows:
Court has jurisdiction over the parties to this action and
over the subject matter hereof pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
§§ 1051, et seq., 28 U.S.C. §§
1331 and 1338. Service of process was properly made on the
Defendants are using Plaintiffs' Trademarks or marks
confusingly similar to Plaintiffs' Trademarks, in
connection with the importation, manufacture, distribution,
sale and offer for sale of ...