DCT
1:25-cv-24193
Kyjen Co LLC v. Individuals Corps Ltd
Key Events
Amended Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: The Kyjen Company, LLC (Colorado)
- Defendant: The Individual, Corporation, Limited Liability Company, Partnership, and/or Unincorporated Association Identified on Schedule A
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
- Case Identification: 1:25-cv-24193, S.D. Fla., 12/18/2025
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant conducts substantial business in the district, has committed acts of copyright infringement there, and targets sales to Florida residents through interactive online stores.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s e-commerce store operator infringes its registered copyright for pet products by selling unauthorized and unlicensed imitations on online marketplaces.
- Technical Context: The dispute centers on the design of interactive pet feeder toys, a segment of the pet products market focused on animal enrichment and mental stimulation.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, administrative proceedings, or licensing history relevant to the asserted copyright.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2005-01-01 | Plaintiff launched its "Outward Hound Products" line. |
| 2023-07-06 | U.S. Copyright Office registration date for "Lickin' Layers". |
| 2025-12-18 | Complaint Filing Date. |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
The provided Second Amended Complaint asserts a single cause of action for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 101, et seq., based on U.S. Copyright Office Registration No. VA 2-360-277 (Compl. ¶2, 41-43). The complaint does not allege infringement of any U.S. patents. Accordingly, an analysis of patents-in-suit is not applicable based on the provided documents.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
- Product Identification: The complaint identifies the accused instrumentalities as "Infringing Products," which are alleged to be "inferior imitations" of Plaintiff's "Outward Hound Products" (Compl. ¶1, 4, 6). These products are allegedly sold through Defendant's "Internet Store," an online marketplace account on platforms such as Walmart.com (Compl. ¶5, 22).
- Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that the accused products are unauthorized copies of Plaintiff’s innovative pet products, which include dog games, toys, and slow feeder bowls (Compl. ¶19, 43). Plaintiff’s products, such as the "Lickin' Layers" puzzle toy, are described as having distinctive and innovative designs (Compl. ¶16, 18). The complaint includes a screenshot of a product listing for Plaintiff's "Lickin' Layers 3-in-1 Interactive Dog Feeder Puzzle" to exemplify its copyrighted designs (Compl. p. 6). Defendant’s online store is alleged to be designed to appear as an authorized retailer, using images and design elements that make it difficult for consumers to distinguish the accused "counterfeit sites from an authorized website" (Compl. ¶24). To illustrate this point, the complaint provides a side-by-side visual comparison of a listing for an "Infringing Product" on Defendant's online store and a listing for the "Genuine Outward Hound Product" (Compl. p. 13).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
As noted in Section II, the complaint does not allege patent infringement. Therefore, a claim chart analysis is not applicable. The core copyright infringement allegation is that the Defendant has "directly copied Plaintiff’s registered Outward Hound Copyright" or that the accused products are "strikingly similar, or at the very least substantially similar" to Plaintiff's copyrighted work (Compl. ¶43).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
As noted in Section II, the complaint does not allege patent infringement. Therefore, an analysis of claim terms for construction is not applicable.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: While not pleaded as a separate count, the prayer for relief requests an injunction against Defendant "aiding, abetting, contributing to, or otherwise assisting anyone in counterfeiting upon the Outward Hound Copyright" and from "passing off, inducing, or enabling others to sell or pass off any product as a genuine Outward Hound Product" (Compl. p. 14, ¶1(c)-(d)).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant's infringement was willful, stating that Defendant acted "knowingly and willfully" and with "reckless disregard or willful blindness to Plaintiff's rights" (Compl. ¶36, 39). The basis for this allegation is Defendant’s alleged prior knowledge of Plaintiff's ownership of the copyright and the popularity and success of the "Outward Hound Products" (Compl. ¶38). Plaintiff seeks enhanced statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(2) based on this alleged willfulness (Compl. p. 16, ¶4).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of copyright scope: does the copyright registration for "Lickin' Layers," a sculptural work, protect the overall design and appearance of the functional pet toy from substantially similar products, or will the useful article doctrine limit the scope of protection to only separable, non-functional artistic features?
- A key factual question will be one of infringement: assuming the copyright is valid and protects the product's design, are the accused products "substantially similar" to the protectable elements of Plaintiff's copyrighted work, as required to establish copyright infringement?
- A significant practical question will be one of enforcement: given the allegations that the defendant is a foreign entity operating under fictitious names through online marketplaces (Compl. ¶20, 30), a primary challenge for the litigation may be identifying the correct legal entity, establishing personal jurisdiction, and ultimately enforcing any judgment that may be awarded.