Judge Robert Sweet
Between 2007 and 2009 California-based Bonita sold more than $600,000 worth of fabric bearing its copyrighted design. Bonita alleged that Ananddoing business as KAS New Yorksold garments bearing unauthorized reproductions of the design over websites and in California stores. On Dec. 20, 2012after a California federal court’s default judgmentBonita entered an amended registration of foreign judgment against Anand for $27,763. Anand moved to dismiss Bonita’s miscellaneous proceeding and to quash subpoenas. He claimed any allegedly infringing goods were sold by Dani II Inc., not him. The court denied Anand’s motion. Substantial evidence supported Bonita’s claim that KAS New York placed the design and accused garments in the stream of commerce to garner business in California. However, fact issues exist as to the legal status and Anand’s role in KAS New York and Dani II’s corporate structure. Given the record’s lack of answers as to what type of entity KAS New York is, whose control it is under and the nature of Anand’s role in KAS New York and Dani II, the court’s exercise of jurisdiction is unclear. Bonita was given 90 days to conduct jurisdictional discovery as to Anand, KAS New York and Dani II’s contacts with California.
