This appeal concerns the question of whether it is proper for a court to enter,

as a sanction for litigation non-compliance, a default judgment and a seven-figure

statutory damages award against a penurious individual who facing related (but

ultimately abandoned) criminal charges arising from the same claims; who is

unrepresented by civil counsel during the pendency of the default motion but has

been advised by assigned criminal counsel not to do more than assert his Fifth

Amendment right against self-incrimination in the civil case; and who is accused

of the “crime” of “wrongfully” using his own family name by the institutional

holder of a registered trademark historically based on that same family name –

conduct which, even upon the default entered against him, the district court

acknowledged made him no money and regarding which there was no proof that it

ever harmed the plaintiffs.