MGA Entertainment Inc. has asked a California federal court to certify an interlocutory appeal of its decision ordering yet another jury trial—its fourth—in the long-running legal battle with hip-hop moguls Clifford “T.I.” Harris and Tameka “Tiny” Harris over the company’s L.O.L. Surprise O.M.G. doll line.

In a motion filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, MGA said it wants to appeal U.S. District Judge James V. Selna’s September 23 order, which directed a new jury to reconsider whether punitive damages should be awarded to the Harrises. The toymaker argued that the order raises “important and controlling questions of law” that should be resolved before another costly trial proceeds.

“Reversal could even require a fifth trial to the bench, further compounding the cost of resolving this action,” MGA wrote. “Before the court and the parties expend time and resources preparing for yet another trial, this court should permit the Ninth Circuit to resolve threshold legal questions that could avoid needless further proceedings.”

MGA Challenges Need for Jury on Punitive Damages

At the heart of MGA’s request is whether punitive damages in a case involving disgorgement of profits should be determined by a judge or a jury. The company contends this is a novel and substantial legal question that warrants immediate appellate review.

MGA argued that proceeding with a fourth jury trial now would be inefficient if the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals later decides that punitive damages must be handled differently.

A Legal Battle Marked by Multiple Trials

MGA first filed suit in 2020, seeking a declaratory judgment that its L.O.L. Surprise O.M.G. dolls did not infringe on the intellectual property or publicity rights of the OMG Girlz, a pop group owned by the Harrises. The Harrises and their companies filed counterclaims alleging that MGA’s doll line intentionally copied the group’s distinctive style and likeness.

The case has already seen a mistrial and two jury verdicts. In September 2024, a third jury awarded the Harrises $17.8 million in compensatory damages and $53.6 million in punitive damages, finding that MGA willfully infringed the trade dress and publicity rights of the OMG Girlz brand.

Judge Selna later vacated the punitive damages award but upheld the compensatory damages, ruling that the evidence did not sufficiently prove willful infringement. The judge then ordered a partial retrial limited to the punitive damages issue, prompting MGA’s motion for interlocutory appeal.

Key Legal Backdrop: The Jack Daniel’s Decision

The third trial followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, which limited the use of the First Amendment as a defense in trademark cases. The high court ruled that defendants cannot claim free expression protection when using another’s mark as their own.

Judge Selna had granted the new trial after concluding that earlier juries were improperly instructed under the now-limited Rogers test, a doctrine the Supreme Court curtailed in Jack Daniel’s.

Representation and Case Information

MGA is represented by Mark A. Finkelstein and Ellen S. Kim of Umberg Zipser LLP; Paul J. Loh, Jason H. Wilson, Kenneth M. Trujillo-Jamison, and Breeanna N. Brewer of Willenken LLP; and Lisa S. Blatt, Amy M. Saharia, and Kimberly Broecker of Williams & Connolly LLP.

T.I., Tiny, and the OMG Girlz are represented by John R. Keville, Chante B. Westmoreland, and Robert L. Green of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, along with B’Ivory LaMarr of The LaMarr Firm PLLC.

The case is MGA Entertainment Inc. v. Harris et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-11548, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.