Legal Opinion

United States v. Kim Tae Sung

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided June 19, 1996No. 95-3701PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

Kim Tae Sung was convicted of selling imitation hair care products with counterfeit trademarks, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2320(a). Last year we affirmed this conviction but remanded for resentencing. 51 F.3d 92 (7th Cir.1995). The district court treated Kim as responsible for $960,000 of counterfeit goods, on the theory that he had purchased 20,000 cartons, enough to hold 240,000 bottles, at a retail price of $4 per bottle. Yet the record shows that Kim actually filled no more than 17,600 bottles, placing an upper bound of $70,400 on infringing sales, and lacked supplies essential to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. Kim Tae SungCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. United States v. Jorge GuerraCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
  2. United States v. Shengyang ZhouCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
  3. Pauly v. Eagle Point Software Co., Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1997
  4. United States v. Stephen D. LambCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
  5. United States v. Kim Tae SungDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1996

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API