What was filed
The complaint is Document 1, filed October 27, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case is emoji company GmbH v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 1:26-cv-09386-VM. The filing seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief and damages over alleged counterfeit goods sold through marketplace accounts listed on Schedule A.
The marks
The complaint lists 41 U.S. trademark registrations as "Plaintiff's Trademarks" and says copies of the registration certificates are attached as Exhibit 2. It alleges the registrations are valid, subsisting, in full force and effect, and incontestable under 15 U.S.C. 1065. One of the listed registrations, U.S. Reg. No. 5,778,247, covers EMOJI in standard characters for toys and games in International Class 28. USPTO Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) records list that registration as live and name two current owners: emoji company GmbH and an individual.
What the complaint alleges
The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that the defendants are individuals and businesses in China or other foreign jurisdictions that sell through user accounts and merchant storefronts on Amazon, and possibly other online marketplaces, under the identities listed in Schedule A. It alleges that the defendants advertise, offer, and sell counterfeit products bearing the EMOJI marks without authorization, that their storefronts share design elements, pricing, and product descriptions that suggest the defendants are related, and that they sell in direct competition with the plaintiff.
Claims and relief requested
The first cause of action alleges trademark counterfeiting under Lanham Act sections 32, 34, and 35, 15 U.S.C. 1114, 1116(d), and 1117(b)-(c). The second alleges infringement of registered trademark under section 32(a), 15 U.S.C. 1114. The third alleges false designation of origin, passing off, and unfair competition under section 43(a), 15 U.S.C. 1125(a). The fourth and fifth allege violations of New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350. Two further counts allege New York common-law unfair competition and unjust enrichment. The prayer seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction against dealing in the counterfeit products, the defendants' profits and the plaintiff's damages with trebling under 15 U.S.C. 1117(b), or in the alternative statutory damages of up to $2,000,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods under 15 U.S.C. 1117(c), an asset freeze or constructive trust, destruction of counterfeit goods, punitive damages, and attorneys' fees.