Brand Advance LLC v. Brand Advance UK et al.

24-CV-8384 (EK) (PCG) (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 13, 2026) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York · February 13, 2026 · No. 24-CV-8384(EK)(PCG)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York adopted a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation granting Brand Advance LLC’s motion for default judgment. The court awarded $3,000,000 in statutory damages, permanently enjoined specified defendants from using the BRAND ADVANCE mark, denied attorney’s fees and costs without prejudice, and directed the Clerk to enter judgment and close the case.

Holdings

  1. When no party objects, the district court reviews the Report and Recommendation for clear error on the face of the record; finding no error, the court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
  2. The court awarded plaintiff $3,000,000 in statutory damages and permanently enjoined the specified defendants and their representatives from using the BRAND ADVANCE mark, unauthorized trademarks, or confusingly similar designations in the prohibited activities and media.
  3. Plaintiff's requests for attorney's fees and costs were denied without prejudice and with leave to renew by March 6.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court should adopt the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation in the absence of objections.
  2. Whether plaintiff should receive $3,000,000 in statutory damages and a permanent injunction prohibiting defendants from using the BRAND ADVANCE mark and confusingly similar designations.
  3. Whether plaintiff's requests for attorney's fees and costs should be denied without prejudice and with leave to renew.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (1)

  • State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Grafman, 968 F. Supp. 2d 480, 481 (E.D.N.Y. 2013)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…