IT'S A 10, Inc. et al v. PH Beauty Labs, Inc. et al, No. 1:2010cv00972 - Document 44 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

Court Description: OPINION re: 22 MOTION to Transfer Case filed by Freeman Beauty, PH Beauty Labs, Inc., 30 FIRST MOTION to Amend/Correct for Leave to File First Amended Complaint filed by IT'S A 10, Inc. Based on the facts and conclusions set forth above, the motion to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Central District of California is denied and the motion for leave to amend is granted. It is so ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 6/14/2010) (tve)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK EXECTRONICALLY FILED .................................... IT'S A 10, INC. and CAROLYN PLUMMER, Plaintiffs, -against- 10 Civ. 972 OPINION PH BEAUTY LABS, INC. and FREEMAN BEAUTY, A Division of PH BEAUTY LABS, INC., Defendants. A P P E A R A N C E S : Attorneys for Plaintiffs TIAJOLOFF & KELLY LLP The Chrysler Building - 37th Floor 405 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10174 By: Edward P. Kelly, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants GIBNEY, ANTHONY & FLAHERTY, LLP 665 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10022 By: Brian W. Brokate, Esq. Walter-Michael Lee, Esq. Sweet, D.J. Defendants pH Beauty Labs, Inc. and Freeman Beauty, a division of pH Beauty, (collectively, "pH Beauty" or "Defendant") have moved pursuant to 28 U.S.C. S 1404(a) to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Plaintiffs It's a 10, Inc. ("It's a 10") and Carolyn Plummer ("Plurnmer") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") have moved pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for leave to amend their complaint. Upon the facts and conclusions set forth below, Defendant's motion to transfer is denied and Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend is granted. Prior Proceedings On February 5, 2010, Plaintiffs filed this action against pH Beauty, alleging that pH Beauty sold women's hair care products that infringe Plaintiffs' trademarks and trade dress. On February 22, 2010, Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction and, on April 7, 2010, a preliminary injunction upon consent was entered in which Defendant agreed to refrain from manufacturing, importing, exporting, distributing, advertising and offering for sale any infringing products during the pendency of this action.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.