How is Missguided responding to the lawsuit filed against it by Kim Kardashian? It isn’t. The British fast fashion brand and its American arm – which were slapped with a strongly-worded trademark infringement, unfair competition, and right of publicity suit by the mega-influencer in a California federal court in February for allegedly using her name and image to sell copycat garments without her authorization – have failed to respond to the suit in any way, prompting Kardashian’s counsel to seek a quick win and monetary damages to go along with it.
According to a recent filing by Kardashian’s counsel, while Missguided has been served with a summons and complaint, thereby calling it to respond and appear in court, the Manchester-headquartered fashion brand has “failed to plead or otherwise defend [itself] in said action.” As a result, Kardashian has asked the court to enter a default judgment, i.e., decide the case in the her favor, and require Missguided USA Finance Inc. to abide by that decision, despite the fact that the company has failed to participate in the case to date.
In the initial complaint, Kardashian’s counsel asked the court to immediately and permanently bar Missguided from using her name and any images of the reality television star, and asserted that “as a direct and proximate result of Missguided’s wrongful conduct, [Kardashian] has suffered, and will continue to suffer, damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $10 million.”
With the foregoing in mind, Kardashian’s counsel has asked the court to enter a default judgment against Misguided on Friday. They will have to prove the damages that are owed by Missguided, not to exceed the amount demanded in the complaint. All the while, Missguided has the right to appeal the entry of default judgment and any damages awarded by the court.
The lawsuit comes on the heels of Missguided posting an image of a lookalike model wearing a metallic cut-out frock, a dead-ringer for a custom Yeezy dress that Kardashian posted an image of just a few hours prior with a plea that “fast fashion brands … please wait until I wear this in real life before you knock it off?” Just a few hours later, Missguided posted a sneak peek of the copycat dress, along with the caption, “The devil works hard but Missguided works harder,” prompting allegations that Kardashian was leaking imagery to the brand as part of a behind-the-scenes deal, something she has since publicly denied.
* The case is Kimsaprincess, Inc.; and Kim Kardashian West v. Missguided USA (Finance) Inc., and Missguided Limited, 2:19-cv-01258 (C.D.Cal).
Share
