最近更新：2024-12-25
2021-cv-01983
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 12/07/2022 | RETURN of U.S. Post Office receipt, article no. 7019 2280 0000 0962 5544. |
| 11/10/2022 | MAILED original SURETY BOND in the amount of $10,000.00 posted by Plaintiff, Nirvana, L.L.C [24], to plaintiff's counsel Greer, Bruns & Crain, Ltd., 300 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 2500, Chicago, IL 60606 via certified mail, article No. 7019 2280 0000 0962 5544. |
| 11/09/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Attorney Douglas B. Harper's motion to withdraw as counsel for defendants TaLang Fashion and Xintachaoliu [140] is granted. Attorney Douglas B. Harper terminated. |
| 11/09/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: In light of the District Judge's dismissal of this case [138], all matters relating to the referral of this case have been resolved. Referral terminated. Mailed notice |
| 11/08/2022 | MOTION by Attorney Douglas B. Harper (Local Counsel) to withdraw as attorney for TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu. No party information provided |
| 11/07/2022 | DEFAULT JUDGMENT Order signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 11/7/2022. Mailed notice |
| 11/08/2022 | ORDER: No defendant has responded to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment [134]. The motion is granted. Based on the evidence submitted in support of the temporary restraining order and the motion for entry of default and default judgment, and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, plaintiff has established that the infringement was willful, that damages should be awarded in the amount of $500,000 per defendant, and that a permanent injunction should be entered. Plaintiff has shown that the infringement of its marks causes it irreparable harm in the form of diminished goodwill and brand confidence, damage to plaintiff's reputation, loss of exclusivity, and loss of future sales; that monetary damages are inadequate to address these harms; and that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction. No defendant has appeared to argue otherwise, thus, the court also finds that the balance of the hardships favors an injunction. The ten thousand dollar ($10,000) surety bond posted by plaintiff is hereby released to plaintiff's counsel. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the surety bond previously deposited with the Clerk of the Court to plaintiff's counsel Greer, Bruns & Crain, Ltd., 300 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 2500, Chicago, IL 60606, via certified mail. Enter Final Judgment Order. Terminate civil case. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 11/8/2022. Mailed notice |
| 10/21/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Any defendant objecting to Plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment [134] must enter an appearance and file a written objection by 10/31/2022. If no objections are filed, the court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice. |
| 10/11/2022 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[135] 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 |
| 10/11/2022 | MEMORANDUM by Nirvana, L.L.C. in support of motion for entry of default, motion for default judgment[134] 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 |
| 10/11/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for entry of default, MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for default judgment as to all remaining Defendants 附件： 1:Exhibit A |
| 10/08/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court adopts the findings and recommendations [131] and grants Plaintiff's renewed motion for sanctions [122]. Talang Fashion and Xintachaoliu did not file objections to the findings and recommendations within 14 days, 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); thus, they have forfeited any objection. Regardless of any forfeiture, on the merits, the court adopts the recommended disposition. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A)(iii), if a party "fails to obey an order to provide or permit discovery," a court may "strik[e] pleadings in whole or in part." Because Talang Fashion and Xintachaoliu have continually failed to participate in discovery in this case, the court strikes their Answer to the Complaint [80]. |
| 09/06/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: The Court's order [131] is modified to add the following line: All of the cases Plaintiff cites in its Reply Brief [127] involve an award of attorneys' fees, which the courts in those cases found to be non-dispositive relief, not the type of an order Plaintiff requests in this case. The rest of order [131] remains the same. Mailed notice |
| 09/06/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Sanctions Under Rule 37 [122] is granted in large part for the reasons set forth very well in the Motion [122] and in Plaintiff's Reply Brief [127]. ThMINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Sanctions Under Rule 37 [122] is granted in large part for the reasons set forth very well in the Motion [122] and in Plaintiff's Reply Brief [127]. The Motion [122] also is unopposed as Defendants Talang Fashion and Xintachaoliu did not respond to it per the briefing schedule set by the Court [124] after the Motion [122] was filed. On the record before the Court, the Court finds that Defendants Te Motion [122] also is unopposed as Defendants Talang Fashion and Xintachaoliu did not respond to it per the briefing schedule set by the Court [124] after the Motion [122] was filed. On the record before the Court, the Court finds that Defendants Talang Fashion and Xintachaoliu have utterly failed to participate in discovery in this case. As set forth in the Motion [122], neither Defendant has responded to Plaintiff's interrogatories and requests for production of documents served monthsalang Fashion and Xintachaoliu have utterly failed to participate in discovery in this case. As set forth in the Motion [122], neither Defendant has responded to Plaintiff's interrogatories and requests for production of documents served months ago, or explained their failure to do so, or requested more time within to serve discovery responses, nor have Defendants participated in requested Local Rule 37.2 conferences to discuss their ongoing discovery defaults. Pursuant to Federal Rule of ago, or explained their failure to do so, or requested more time within to serve discovery responses, nor have Defendants participated in requested Local Rule 37.2 conferences to discuss their ongoing discovery defaults. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A)(iii), Plaintiff requests that the Court sanction Defendants Talang Fashion and Xintachaoliu for their refusal to participate in discovery by striking their Answer to the Complaint [80]. In the Court's view, that is aCivil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A)(iii), Plaintiff requests that the Court sanction Defendants Talang Fashion and Xintachaoliu for their refusal to participate in discovery by striking their Answer to the Complaint [80]. In the Court's view, that is an appropriate and measured sanction under Rule 37 for these Defendants' failure to respond to written discovery. The Court disagrees with Plaintiff, however, that a magistrate judge can enter such a sanction consistent with the referral order [n appropriate and measured sanction under Rule 37 for these Defendants' failure to respond to written discovery. The Court disagrees with Plaintiff, however, that a magistrate judge can enter such a sanction consistent with the referral order [119] ("this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: discovery supervision and scheduling, to set a deadline to file amended pleadings, to set a dispositive motion119] ("this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: discovery supervision and scheduling, to set a deadline to file amended pleadings, to set a dispositive motions schedule, and for settlement"), Internal Operating Procedure 14, and 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). Striking Defendants Talang Fashion's and Xintachaoliu's Answer to the Complaint [80] effectively will permit Plaintiff to obtain a default s schedule, and for settlement"), Internal Operating Procedure 14, and 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). Striking Defendants Talang Fashion's and Xintachaoliu's Answer to the Complaint [80] effectively will permit Plaintiff to obtain a default judgment against them and that is a case dispositive order. The Court does not read the authority submitted by Plaintiff to permit it to enter an order that effectively would grant dispositive relief to a party in a referred case, and the Court has fjudgment against them and that is a case dispositive order. The Court does not read the authority submitted by Plaintiff to permit it to enter an order that effectively would grant dispositive relief to a party in a referred case, and the Court has found no such authority in its own research that would support entry of such an order here. All of the cases Plaintiff cites in its Reply Brief [127] involve an award of attorneys' fees, which the courts in those cases found to be non-dispositiveound no such authority in its own research that would support entry of such an order here. All of the cases Plaintiff cites in its Reply Brief [127] involve an award of attorneys' fees, which the courts in those cases found to be non-dispositive relief, not the type of an order Plaintiff requests in this case. The Court, therefore, recommends to the assigned District Judge that she accept the findings and recommendation made herein, and enter an order striking Talang Fashion's and Xint relief, not the type of an order Plaintiff requests in this case. The Court, therefore, recommends to the assigned District Judge that she accept the findings and recommendation made herein, and enter an order striking Talang Fashion's and Xintachaoliu's Answer to the Complaint [80] as a discovery sanction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A)(iii) because these Defendants have failed to respond to Plaintiff's written discovery in this case. Defendants are direcachaoliu's Answer to the Complaint [80] as a discovery sanction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A)(iii) because these Defendants have failed to respond to Plaintiff's written discovery in this case. Defendants are directed to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2) for their appeal rights including their right to appeal this report and recommendation within 14 days of this docket entry by which they are being served with this order. Mailed notice Modifited to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2) for their appeal rights including their right to appeal this report and recommendation within 14 days of this docket entry by which they are being served with this order. Mailed notice Modified on 9/6/2022. (Main Document 131 replaced on 9/6/2022).ed on 9/6/2022. (Main Document 131 replaced on 9/6/2022). (Main Document 131 replaced on 9/6/2022). |
| 08/24/2022 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. by Justin Tyler Joseph |
| 08/24/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Isaku M. Begert's motion to withdraw as counsel of record on behalf of plaintiff [128] is granted. Attorney Isaku Begert terminated. |
| 08/23/2022 | MOTION by Attorney Isaku M. Begert to withdraw as attorney for Nirvana, L.L.C. No party information provided |
| 08/01/2022 | REPLY by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. in Support of its Motion for Sanctions as to Defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu [122] |
| 07/20/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: Telephone status hearing held on 7/20/22. Counsel for Plaintiff appeared. No one appeared for Defendants. Both parties should address in their forthcoming briefs whether the relief Plaintiff is seeking in its Motion [80], i.e. that the Court strike Defendant TaLang Fashion's and Defendant xintachaoliu's Answer to the Complaint as a discovery sanction, is relief that this Magistrate Judge can grant in a referred case consistent with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). Mailed notice |
| 07/19/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: Plaintiff's Motion to Stay [123] is denied. Defendant's alleged failure to participate meaningfully in discovery is not a reason to excuse the filing of a joint status report. The status hearing previously set for tomorrow, 7/20/22 [121], will proceed as scheduled with or without the filing of a status report. The Court expects counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant Qitianly to appear by telephone for that status hearing. Mailed notice |
| 07/19/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: Defendant shall respond to Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to Rule 37 [122] by 7/25/22. If a response is filed, Plaintiff may file a reply in support of its motion by 8/1/22. Mailed notice |
| 07/15/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. to stay |
| 07/13/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for Sanctions pursuant to Rule 37 Renewed 附件： 1:Declaration of Isaku M. Begert |
| 06/29/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Gilbert for the purposes of holding proceedings related to: discovery supervision and scheduling, to set a deadline to file amended pleadings, to set a dispositive motions schedule, and for settlement. Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to Rule 37 120 is denied without prejudice. At the Court's instance, however, Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff's First Set of Requests for Production, First Set of Interrogatories, and First Set of Requests for Admission ("Plaintiff's Discovery Requests"), served on 5/19/22, by 7/8/22. If Defendants cannot do so for some reason, then they will need to file a motion that establishes good cause for the additional delay on their already overdue discovery responses. If Defendants do not respond to Plaintiff's Plaintiff's Discovery Requests in accordance with this order, and any motion seeking more time is not filed or granted, then Plaintiff may renew its motion for sanctions. Plaintiff's Motion 120 is denied as of now because the relief sought (striking Defendants' answer to the complaint without leave to refile) is far out of proportion to Defendants' alleged infraction of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (failing to respond to Plaintiff's written discovery requests in a timely manner). Plaintiff appears to have waited two and one-half months to serve its "expedited" discovery requests and Defendants now appear to be a little over a month overdue in responding to them, but that delay, though unexcused as of now, does not justify the relief Plaintiff is seeking, in the exercise of Court's discretion. The parties shall file a joint initial status report in accordance with the Court's Standing Order for Initial Status Report for Cases Before Magistrate Judge Gilbert, posted on the Court's website www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Judges, by 7/15/22. A telephone status hearing is set for 7/20/22 at 10:30 a.m. The call-in number for the hearing is 877-336-1829, access code 1022195, press #. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions. Mailed notice |
| 06/28/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for sanctions pursuant to Rule 37 附件： 1:Declaration of Isaku M. Begert |
| 06/27/2022 | Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: discovery supervision and scheduling, to set a deadline to file amended pleadings, to set a dispositive motions schedule, and for settlement. |
| 06/24/2022 | STATUS Report Joint, per 117 by Nirvana, L.L.C. |
| 05/25/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Telephonic status hearing held on 5/25/2022. Plaintiff and defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu are directed to file a joint status report by 6/24/2022 to update the court on the status of settlement, unless a stipulation of dismissal is filed prior to that date. |
| 05/20/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for status hearing [114] is granted. Telephonic status hearing set for 5/25/2022 at 10:00 a.m. All parties' counsel are required to attend the status hearing. Dial toll-free call-in number: (888) 684-8852; followed by the conference access code: 9482028#. Audio recording of the hearing is not permitted; violations of this prohibition may result in sanctions deemed necessary by the court. |
| 05/19/2022 | STATUS Report per [113] by Nirvana, L.L.C. |
| 05/16/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for Status Hearing Requiring Counsel to Participate |
| 04/22/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's status report 112 indicates that plaintiff has reached a settlement agreement with defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu. Plaintiff and defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu are directed to file a joint status report on the status of settlement by 5/19/2022, unless defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu settle and are dismissed before then. |
| 04/21/2022 | STATUS Report per [111] by Nirvana, L.L.C. |
| 04/07/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment against TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu 86 is denied. The Seventh Circuit has "emphasize[d] the importance of allowing a party the opportunity to take meaningful discovery before granting summary judgment against her." Smith v. OSF Healthcare Sys., 933 F.3d 859, 866 (7th Cir. 2019). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d)(1), a court may deny a summary judgment motion "[i]f a nonmovant shows by affidavit or declaration that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to justify its opposition." Here, no discovery has taken place and defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu have offered a declaration from Adam Engel 99 that these defendants cannot determine the validity of the trademarks at issue or what rights were assigned to plaintiff without discovery. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied without prejudice because it is premature to grant summary judgment before TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu have had the opportunity to take discovery. Plaintiff, TaLang Fashion, and xintachaoliu are directed to file a joint status report addressing how they intend to proceed by 4/21/2022. |
| 03/04/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal 108 is granted and plaintiff's motion for reconsideration 107 of order 105 is denied. "A party cannot use a motion for reconsideration to introduce evidence previously available, to tender new legal theories, or to rehash old arguments." Easypower Corp. v. Alden Corp., 522 F. Supp. 2d 1060, 1063 (N.D. Ill. 2007) (internal quotation marks omitted). Reconsideration is "only appropriate to correct manifest errors of law or to present newly discovered evidence." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). The only arguably appropriate basis for reconsideration put forth in plaintiff's motion is the contention that the temporary restraining order against TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu remained in effect despite the court's order extending the temporary restraining order only "until May 18, 2021." 29. Yet, as the court has already explained, the temporary restraining order expired on its own terms and was not in effect after May 18, 2021. 105 at 6-7. If a plaintiff believes it is appropriate or necessary to extend a temporary restraining order beyond the 28-day limit set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b), see H-D Michigan, LLC v. Hellenic Duty Free Shops S.A., 694 F.3d 827, 844-45 (7th Cir. 2012), then plaintiff may request that the court do so. Plaintiff did not do so here, and the temporary restraining order therefore expired after 28 days. 105 at 6-7. The remainder of plaintiff's arguments are not properly raised in a reconsideration motion and, even if considered, are unpersuasive for the reasons set forth in the order 105. |
| 03/03/2022 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Justin R. Gaudio regarding MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for reconsideration regarding order on motion for preliminary injunction, [105] [107] |
| 03/03/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for leave to file under seal |
| 03/03/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for reconsideration regarding order on motion for preliminary injunction, [105] 附件： 1:Declaration of Justin R. Gaudio 2:Exhibit 2 |
| 03/01/2022 | PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 3/1/2022: |
| 03/01/2022 | ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 3/1/2022: Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction against TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu [31] is granted except with respect to the requested asset freeze. |
| 01/20/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend Schedule A to the complaint instanter 102 is granted. Amdi Rouu terminated. |
| 01/14/2022 | AMENDED exhibit[2] Amended Schedule A |
| 01/14/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C.for Leave to Amend Schedule A to the Complaint Instanter |
| 10/08/2021 | REPLY by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment and a Statutory Damages Award as to Defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu 86 |
| 10/01/2021 | RULE 56 (b)(3) Statement by TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu regarding motion for summary judgment 86 |
| 10/01/2021 | AFFIDAVIT by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu in Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for summary judgment and a Statutory Damages Award as to Defendants TaLang Fashion and Xintachaoliu 86 |
| 10/01/2021 | MEMORANDUM by TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu in Opposition to motion for summary judgment 86 |
| 09/27/2021 | RESPONSE by TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliuin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for preliminary injunction 31 setting forth argument based on Plaintiff's recent damages election |
| 09/27/2021 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The response by Defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu to plaintiff's summary judgment motion 86 was due 9/24/2021 92. Instead of filing a response, Defendants waited until the day the response was due to file a request 93 for an extension of time to file their response based on their intention to file a Rule 56(d) motion opposing the entry of summary judgment, a stay of summary judgment briefing pending resolution of Defendants' forthcoming Rule 56(d) motion, and an order setting an initial conference so discovery can proceed. Plaintiff filed an opposition to Defendants motion 94 on the basis that Defendants failed to point to any specific discovery that was necessary for the resolution of the pending summary judgment motion. Having reviewed these submissions, the court grants in part and denies in part Defendants' motion. Defendants have not pointed to any facts to support their requested extension of time to respond to the summary judgment motion, nor have they provided any basis to excuse their failure to seek an extension before the day their response was due. Nevertheless, Defendants are granted an extension to respond to Plaintiffs' summary judgment motion. Defendants' response is due by 10/1/2021. Defendants may base their response on Rule 56(d) if they believe that Plaintiff's motion cannot be resolved without discovery. Plaintiff's reply is due by 10/8/2021. If Defendants choose to file a separate Rule 56(d) motion, that motion is due by 10/8/2021; Plaintiff's opposition is due by 10/22/2021; and any reply is due by 10/29/2021. Before filing a separate Rule 56(d) motion, however, Defendants should seriously consider whether there is any value to doing so or if such a motion will merely be duplicative of their response to Plaintiff's summary judgment motion. Given the outstanding summary judgment motion and Defendants' stated intention to brief the issue of whether discovery is necessary, the Court finds that there is good cause to delay entering a scheduling order until these issues are resolved. |
| 09/27/2021 | REPLY by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu to response in opposition to motion, 94, notice of filing 91, motion by filer to set a briefing schedule, motion for discovery, motion for extension of time to file response/reply, 93 |
| 09/26/2021 | RESPONSE by Nirvana, L.L.C.in Opposition to MOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu to set a briefing schedule for Defendants' Rule 56(d) MotionMOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu for discovery and Initial Conference so that discovery may proceedMOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu for extension of time to file response/reply as to set motion and R&R deadlines/hearings[92], notice of filing[91] [93] |
| 09/24/2021 | MOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu to set a briefing schedule for Defendants' Rule 56(d) Motion, MOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu for discovery and Initial Conference so that discovery may proceed, MOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu for extension of time to file response/reply as to set motion and R&R deadlines/hearings[92], notice of filing[91] |
| 09/13/2021 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu shall file their opposition to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment 86 by 9/24/2021. Plaintiff's reply is due by 10/1/2021. |
| 09/10/2021 | NOTICE by Nirvana, L.L.C. re MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for summary judgment and a Statutory Damages Award as to Defendants TaLang Fashion and Xintachaoliu[86] |
| 09/10/2021 | DECLARATION of Isaku M. Begert regarding Rule 56 statement[88] 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 2:Exhibit 2 3:Exhibit 3 |
| 09/10/2021 | DECLARATION of Allie Shapland regarding Rule 56 statement[88] 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 2:Exhibit 2 3:Exhibit 3 4:Exhibit 4 5:Exhibit 5 6:Exhibit 6 7:Exhibit 7 |
| 09/10/2021 | RULE 56.1(a)(3) Statement by Nirvana, L.L.C. regarding motion for summary judgment[86] |
| 09/10/2021 | MEMORANDUM by Nirvana, L.L.C. in support of motion for summary judgment[86] |
| 09/10/2021 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for summary judgment and a Statutory Damages Award as to Defendants TaLang Fashion and Xintachaoliu |
| 08/13/2021 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The motion by defendants TaLang Fashion (No. 30) and xintachaoliu (No. 53) (collectively, the "non-defaulting defendants") to set aside entry of default 81 is denied as moot because the court has not entered default against the non-defaulting defendants. See 71 (explicitly excluding TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu from the court's entry of default pursuant to Rule 55(a)). In light of the non-defaulting defendants' timely objection to the entry of default, plaintiff's motion for entry of default 55 is denied with respect to the non-defaulting defendants. In addition, plaintiff's motion for default judgment as to all defendants 68 is denied as moot because that motion incorrectly assumed that default had been entered against all defendants, including the non-defaulting defendants. As explained above, default has not been entered against TaLang Fashion or xintachaoliu. If plaintiff wishes to move for default judgment against the defaulting defendants even though claims remain pending against the non-defaulting defendants, Plaintiff must file a motion seeking entry of partial final judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). Any such motion must explain, citing precedent from this Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court, why, in plaintiff's view, there is no just reason to delay entry of a final judgment in this case as to fewer than all claims or parties. Any such motion must account for the fact that "requests under Rule 54(b) are granted neither routinely nor as a matter of course." Architectural Floor Prods. Co. v. Don Brann & Assocs. Co., 551 F. Supp. 802, 807 (N.D. Ill. 1982). Moreover, any argument as to why relief is warranted under Rule 54(b) cannot conflict with plaintiff's pleading allegations. See Oakley, Inc. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A", No. 20-cv-05049 (N.D. Ill.) (Kness, J.), Dkt. 66 at 2 (denying partial final judgment under Rule 54(b) where Plaintiff's complaint alleged that "Defendants are an interrelated group of infringers working in active concert"). |
| 08/13/2021 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Defendant Pudada at Line No. 151 is hereby dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Notice of Dismissal Under Rule 41(a)(1) 83 filed by Plaintiff on 8/13/2021. Pudada terminated. |
| 08/13/2021 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Nirvana, L.L.C. as to certain defendant |
| 08/10/2021 | NOTICE by xintachaoliu re MOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu to set aside memorandum in opposition to motion[79] [81], memorandum in opposition to motion[79] |
| 08/10/2021 | MOTION by Defendants TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu to set aside memorandum in opposition to motion[79] |
| 08/10/2021 | ANSWER to Complaint by TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu |
| 08/10/2021 | MEMORANDUM by TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu in Opposition to motion for default judgment[68] and in support of cross-motion to set aside entry of default |
| 08/10/2021 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant xintachaoliu by Douglas B. Harper and LOCAL COUNSEL DESIGNATION in compliance with LR83.15 |
| 08/10/2021 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant TaLang Fashion by Douglas B. Harper and LOCAL COUNSEL DESIGNATION in compliance with LR83.15 |
| 08/03/2021 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court construes the status report 75 filed by defendants TaLang Fashion (No. 30) and xintachaoliu (No. 53) as a motion for extension of time. So construed, the motion is granted. Defendants TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu have until 8/10/2021 to answer the complaint, oppose entry of default and default judgment, and to designate local counsel. The court notes that it has already granted defendants numerous extensions of time, and is unlikely to grant any further requests for an extension absent strong cause. |
| 08/02/2021 | STATUS Report re: timing to oppose default judgment and appoint local counsel by TaLang Fashion, xintachaoliu |
| 07/23/2021 | NOTICE by Nirvana, L.L.C. re reply to response to motion 73 |
| 07/23/2021 | REPLY by Nirvana, L.L.C. to MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for preliminary injunction 31 附件： 1:Declaration of Justin R. Gaudio 2:Exhibit 1 3:Exhibit 2 4:Exhibit 3 |
| 07/23/2021 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Any defendant objecting to Plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) 68 must file an appearance and file a written objection by 8/2/2021. If no objections are filed, the court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice. |
| 07/23/2021 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Apart from defendants TaLang Fashion (No. 30) and xintachaoliu (No. 53), no defendant has appeared in this case. In addition, no defendant has answered the complaint or objected to Plaintiff's motion for entry of default under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) 55. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for entry of default under Rule 55(a) 55 is granted with respect to all defendants apart from TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu. TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu must advise the court by 8/2/2021 whether they object to the motion for entry of default. As noted in the court's previous order 61, TaLang Fashion and xintachaoliu must also designate a local counsel by that date. |
| 07/16/2021 | NOTICE by Nirvana, L.L.C. re MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for default judgment as to all Defendants, Including a Request for an Award of Statutory Damages 68 |
| 07/16/2021 | MEMORANDUM by Nirvana, L.L.C. in support of motion for default judgment 68 附件： 1:Declaration of Justin R. Gaudio 2:Exhibit 1 |
| 07/16/2021 | MOTION by Plaintiff Nirvana, L.L.C. for default judgment as to all Defendants, Including a Request for an Award of Statutory Damages |
案件最新进展，来源于美国联邦法院，下载文件请联系 18523047090 微信同号
被告名单文件：部分原告会选择隐匿发案，或者对提交的文件进行密封处理，因此包括被告信息在内的相关文件不会在前期公开（一般PI阶段左右才会公开）。
诉状：诉状通常包括原被告的基本信息、侵权行为、侵权类型，以及诉讼请求，如确认侵权、下架侵权产品、请求赔偿等，这个文件起诉就可以下载
案件每天自动更新，未及时更新的可点击 案件名称旁边 更新 按钮
