CALIFORNIA — The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated AirDoctor’s request for $2.5 million in damages against a competitor who sold counterfeit air filters using its trademarks, ruling Friday that a default judgment does not require the plaintiff to name a specific damages amount in the initial complaint to seek actual damages.
The published 13-page opinion reverses a 2023 ruling by U.S. District Judge George H. Wu, who had denied AirDoctor’s damages request after Xiamen Qichuang Trade Co. Ltd. failed to appear in the case. The default judgment came after AirDoctor accused the Chinese firm of trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising under the Lanham Act and California state law.
The AirDoctor trademark default judgment dispute centers on copycat filters that Xiamen allegedly sold on Amazon between December 2021 and June 2022, advertising them as compatible with AirDoctor purifiers and misusing the marks “AIRDOCTOR” and “ULTRAHEPA”. More than 43,000 units were sold, according to the complaint.
