最近更新：2025-02-16
2024-cv-11860
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 02/11/2025 | SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendant The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A |
| 02/11/2025 | SUMMONS Submitted (Court Participant) for defendant(s) The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC |
| 02/07/2025 | ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 2/7/2025: |
| 02/07/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for expedited discovery, [28], is granted in part and denied in part. Enter Order. |
| 02/06/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion to unseal certain documents, [29], is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to unseal Schedule A to the Complaint [2] and Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Emily Holt [17]. |
| 02/05/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC to unseal document exhibit[17], exhibit[2] |
| 02/05/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC for discovery Expedited |
| 01/31/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to comply with order, 25, is granted. If plaintiff wishes to proceed with this case, plaintiff must file its exhibits publicly on the docket by 2/7/2025. |
| 01/31/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, 24, is denied. "While motions to reconsider are permitted. they are disfavored." Patrick v. City of Chicago, 103 F. Supp. 3d 907, 911 (N.D. Ill. 2015). "This is a heavy burden for the moving party and makes a motion for reconsideration an inappropriate medium to 'rehash' past arguments[.]" Alice F. v. Health Care Serv. Corp., No. 17-cv-3710, 2019 WL 11626480, at *1 (N.D. Ill. June 17, 2019) (citation omitted). "Motions for reconsideration serve a limited function: to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence." Caisse Nationale de Credit Agricole v. CBI Indus., Inc., 90 F.3d 1264, 1269 (7th Cir. 1996) (citation omitted). Plaintiff has not submitted any newly discovered evidence. Thus, plaintiff can prevail only if it demonstrates that the court made a manifest error of law or fact. "A manifest error of law or fact under this standard occurs when a district court 'has patently misunderstood a party, or has made a decision outside the adversarial issues presented to the Court by the parties, or has made an error not of reasoning but of apprehension.'" Patrick, 103 F. Supp. 3d at 912 (quoting Bank of Waunakee v. Rochester Cheese Sales, Inc., 906 F.2d 1185, 1191 (7th Cir. 1990)). Plaintiff has not shown that the court made a manifest error of law or fact. Plaintiff points out that the court has the power to issue an asset restraint when a plaintiff seeks an accounting and profits in the alternative to statutory damages in its complaint. See CSC Holdings, Inc. v. Redisi, 309 F.3d 988, 996 (7th Cir. 2002) (asset freeze was "appropriate" when plaintiff sought statutory damages or equitable relief in the alternative). But simply because a court has the authority to issue an asset freeze in such circumstances does not mean that the plaintiff here is entitled to one. As explained in the prior minute entry, 22, the court is not persuaded that plaintiff intends to actually seek or obtain equitable relief-as opposed to statutory damages-in this case. Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, 24, is denied. |
| 01/17/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC for extension of time to Comply with Order 22 |
| 01/17/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC for reconsideration regarding order on motion for leave to file, order on motion for temporary restraining order, text entry, 22 |
| 01/17/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for electronic service of process, 18, is granted. The court finds that electronic service of process is proper under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3). Electronic service of process does not violate any treaty and is consistent with due process because it effectively communicates the pendency of this action to defendants. To the extent that the motion requests service of process of any temporary restraining order in this case, service is not necessary because this court has already denied the motion for a TRO. 22. |
| 01/17/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motions for leave to file under seal, 3, and for a temporary restraining order, temporary asset restraint, and expedited discovery, 13, are denied. Plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal so that plaintiff may obtain a temporary restraining order freezing the defendants' assets before revealing the defendants' identities. See 3. "The Supreme Court has made clear that courts lack the power to issue an asset freeze at the beginning of a case, unless that party is seeking equitable monetary relief." Zorro Productions, Inc. v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto, No. 23-cv-5761, 2023 WL 8807254, at *4 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 20, 2023) (citing Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo S.A. v. All. Bond Fund, Inc., 527 U.S. 308 (1999)); see also Shenzhen Yihong Lighting Co., Ltd. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 23-cv-1560, at Dkt. 15 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 22, 2023). Indeed, "[a]s a general matter [ ] prejudgment asset restraints are not proper simply to establish a fund from which a later award of money damages can be satisfied." Id. (second alteration in original) (quoting Banister v. Firestone, No. 17-cv-8940, 2018 WL 4224444, at *9 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 5, 2018)). In Schedule A cases, plaintiffs often initially demand equitable relief in the form of an accounting of profits, but after obtaining a temporary asset freeze, plaintiffs uniformly shift their focus to demanding statutory damages. Id. at *3-4. In substance, then, if not in form, Schedule A plaintiffs seek prejudgment asset restraints to establish a fund from which money damages may be awarded. So, despite the demand in plaintiff's complaint that it be awarded defendants' profits, the court is not persuaded that plaintiff will actually seek or obtain such equitable relief-as opposed to statutory damages-in this case. See Zorro, 2023 WL 8807254, at *3-4. Thus, even if plaintiff's initial demand for an accounting of profits could provide this court with the power to issue a prejudgment asset freeze, see Grupo Mexicano, 527 U.S. at 333; Banister, 2018 WL 4224444, at *9, the court is not persuaded that such a freeze is warranted. Because the court denies the motion for a temporary restraining order, there is no reason to seal plaintiff's filings pending such relief. Plaintiff's motions for leave to file under seal, 3, and for a temporary restraining order, 13, are therefore denied. Plaintiff's sealed exhibits, 2, 17, are stricken. If plaintiff wishes to proceed with this case, plaintiff must file its exhibits publicly on the docket by 1/31/2025. |
| 12/20/2024 | ANNUAL REMINDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 (Notification of Affiliates), any nongovernmental party, other than an individual or sole proprietorship, must file a statement identifying all its affiliates known to the party after diligent review or, if the party has identified no affiliates, then a statement reflecting that fact must be filed. An affiliate is defined as follows: any entity or individual owning, directly or indirectly (through ownership of one or more other entities), 5% or more of a party. The statement is to be electronically filed as a PDF in conjunction with entering the affiliates in CM/ECF as prompted. As a reminder to counsel, parties must supplement their statements of affiliates within thirty (30) days of any change in the information previously reported. This minute order is being issued to all counsel of record to remind counsel of their obligation to provide updated information as to additional affiliates if such updating is necessary. If counsel has any questions regarding this process, this LINK will provide additional information. Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 12/20/2024: Mailed notice. |
| 11/21/2024 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 19 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 2:(Exhibit 2) |
| 11/21/2024 | MEMORANDUM by Merch Traffic, LLC in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 18 |
| 11/21/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3) |
| 11/21/2024 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC Exhibit 2 regarding declaration 16 附件： 1:(Exhibit 2-1) |
| 11/21/2024 | DECLARATION of Emily Holt regarding memorandum in support of motion 14 附件： 1:(Exhibit 1) |
| 11/21/2024 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 14 附件： 1:(Exhibit 4) 2:Exhibit 3 3:Exhibit 1 4:Exhibit 2 |
| 11/21/2024 | MEMORANDUM by Merch Traffic, LLC in support of motion for temporary restraining order 13 |
| 11/21/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC for temporary restraining order including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery |
| 11/19/2024 | MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials. |
| 11/19/2024 | MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. |
| 11/18/2024 | CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. |
| 11/18/2024 | CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable M. David Weisman. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). |
| 11/18/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC by Luana Faria De Souza (Faria De Souza, Luana) |
| 11/18/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC by Kahlia Roe Halpern |
| 11/18/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC by Amy Crout Ziegler |
| 11/18/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC by Justin R. Gaudio |
| 11/18/2024 | Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Merch Traffic, LLC |
| 11/18/2024 | NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Merch Traffic, LLC |
| 11/18/2024 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 11/18/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC for leave to file under Seal |
| 11/18/2024 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Merch Traffic, LLC Schedule A regarding complaint[1] |
| 11/18/2024 | COMPLAINT filed by Merch Traffic, LLC; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22742428. 附件： 1:Exhibit 4 2:Exhibit 3 3:Exhibit 2 4:Exhibit 1 |
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
