最近更新：2025-02-25
2024-cv-01851
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 10/30/2024 | SATISFACTION of Judgment of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 10/10/2024 | ENTERED JUDGMENT Mailed notice |
| 10/04/2024 | FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER Signed by the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings on 10/4/2024. Mailed notice |
| 10/04/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: No remaining defendant has responded to plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment. Accordingly, the motion [32] is granted. Based on the evidence previously submitted by plaintiff and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, plaintiff has established that a permanent injunction should be entered. The infringement of plaintiff's marks irreparably harms plaintiff and confuses the public. This infringement was willful and statutory damages are awarded. After considering the nature of the products, the price point, the absence of any concrete evidence of lost profits or high-volume infringement by defendants (plaintiff has failed to seek an accounting of profits), the value of plaintiff's brand, and the need to deter infringement that is easily committed and difficult to stop, the Court concludes that $25,000 is an appropriate award of statutory damages. Enter Final Judgment Order. All pending deadlines and hearings are stricken. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice |
| 10/03/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: The previously set 9/30/24 tracking status hearing is stricken and re-set to 10/25/24 at 9:00 a.m. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| 09/03/2024 | CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan regarding text entry, 40 |
| 09/03/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Before the Court is plaintiff's motion 32 for entry of default and default judgment against all defendants. All remaining defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. Accordingly, an order of default is entered under Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Any objections to the motion for entry of default judgment must be filed on or before 9/18/24. If no objections are filed by that date, the Court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining defendants within one business day of its entry on the docket and must promptly file proof of that service. Mailed notice |
| 08/28/2024 | PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Order Signed by the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings on 8/28/2024. Mailed notice |
| 08/26/2024 | NEW PARTIES: AiWeiBaDi, Ancfun Art, Atrippy, bin zhen quality poster, BXNo1SHUAI, Can be applied to, ChengDuAngDeYuanYiDianZiShangWuYouXianGongSi, Chrisna Art, CKCRC, Cold Frog, Czmiddle, DARK STAR ONE, Dmored Direct, dongge's, Erica 's Shop, Faith ACrow, fuyanxieye, FZHGHT, Garden Meta, Gray La Vie, GuanqhZjl Store, hebobaihuo, hejinshinuohuimaoyiyouxiangongsi, HuangHaiCheng, Jekeno, JingBang Poster, JTMTYWW, kdlhegoirhg, lisufang, LoveTaoTao, LSTAMOY-US, MengLe Toy, Omeilai, PAEOT, Piqiucaishen Store, putianlichengxiangjuyuemaoyiyou xiangong, putianshilichengquxinghuiriyongpindian, QuanCheng, quanzhoushihuaicongwangluokejiyouxiangongsi, qzxingqiang, Shangde Bureau Zhuo Technology Co LTD, Spanker Space, Spirit-India, TODIYADDU, TYTYUU, Vision Graphics Inc, wechangqi, wpcheng, XINCHENGZHI, XMYZYP, yanshiming poster, Ymoryiyi, YSM-US, YXICHE, Zeus LLC and ZhiYan Artwork added to case caption. |
| 08/26/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 28 is granted. Plaintiff's filings establish that it has acted expeditiously to protect its interests and that there remains a significant risk defendants will transfer relevant assets beyond the Court's reach. For these reasons, as well as the reasons provided in the whole of plaintiff's filings and as stated by the Court in connection with entry of the TRO, the Court is persuaded that plaintiff has satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction. In addition, the Court finds that the balance of harms favors plaintiff and that a preliminary injunction serves the public interest by, among other things, protecting consumers from the marketing of counterfeit goods. Plaintiff has also certified and established that it provided electronic notice to defendants of the pendency of this action and the motion, but no objection to the motion for a preliminary injunction has been filed on behalf of any defendant. Plaintiff shall submit an updated proposed preliminary injunction order reflecting the remaining defendants on Schedule A to the Court's proposed order inbox by 8/30/24. Plaintiff's counsel is directed to ensure that all defendants listed on Schedule A are added to the court's docket within five business days. The Clerk is requested to unseal any previously-sealed documents. The previously set 8/9/24 tracking status hearing is stricken and re-set to 9/30/24 at 9:00 a.m. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| 08/14/2024 | CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan regarding text entry, 36 |
| 08/14/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Before the Court is plaintiff's motion for entry of a preliminary injunction 28. In connection with that motion, plaintiff must serve all remaining defendants with the following statement: "The Court has taken the motion for a preliminary injunction under advisement and will consider the motion unopposed if no defendant appears and objects by or before August 21, 2024." If no objections are filed by that date, the Court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining defendants within one business day of its entry on the docket and must promptly file proof of that service. Mailed notice |
| 07/26/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: The 7/26/24 tracking status hearing is stricken and re-set to 8/9/24 at 9:00 a.m. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| 06/21/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: The 6/21/24 tracking status hearing is stricken and re-set to 7/26/24 at 9:00 a.m. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| 06/19/2024 | MEMORANDUM by Angus Setyawan in support of motion for default judgment 32 附件： 1:Declaration Declaration of David Gulbransen 2:Exhibit Exhibit 1 3:(Exhibit Exhibit 2) |
| 06/19/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan for default judgment as to all remaining defendants |
| 05/30/2024 | MAILED copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC. (jn,) |
| 05/24/2024 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Angus Setyawan of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 05/23/2024 | MEMORANDUM by Angus Setyawan in support of motion for preliminary injunction 28 附件： 1:Declaration Declaration of David Gulbransen 2:(Exhibit Exhibit 1) |
| 05/23/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan for preliminary injunction |
| 05/23/2024 | SUMMONS Returned Executed by Angus Setyawan as to Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 5/23/2024, answer due 6/13/2024. |
| 05/23/2024 | CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan regarding order on motion to seal document, order on motion for temporary restraining order, order on motion for leave to file excess pages, set/reset hearings, 10, sealed document 2 |
| 05/23/2024 | SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A |
| 05/23/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings:Plaintiff's motion for electronic service 21 is denied as moot as the Court previously granted plaintiff's request for such service in its order granting plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order 10, which also included such a request. The 5/31/24 tracking status hearing is stricken and re-set to 6/21/24 at 9:00 a.m. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| 05/14/2024 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Angus Setyawan of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 05/09/2024 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Angus Setyawan of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 05/05/2024 | MEMORANDUM by Angus Setyawan in support of motion for service by publication 21 附件： 1:Declaration Declaration of David Gulbransen 2:Exhibit Exhibit 1 3:(Exhibit Exhibit 2) |
| 05/05/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan for service by publication and/or electronic mail |
| 05/03/2024 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Angus Setyawan of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 05/02/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: The Court has reviewed plaintiff's ex parte motion for extension of the TRO 18, in which plaintiff asks the Court for a second 14-day extension of the TRO entered on 3/27/24. Plaintiff's motion for extension of TRO is denied for the following reasons. First, plaintiff has already been granted one extension of the TRO, thus reaching the 28-day outer limit for a TRO issued without the consent of the enjoined parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2) ("[A TRO] expires at the time after entry--not to exceed 14 days--that the court sets, unless before that time the court, for good cause, extends it for a like period or the adverse party consents to a longer extension."); H-D Michigan, LLC v. Hellenic Duty Free Shops S.A., 694 F.3d 827, 844 (7th Cir. 2012) ("In our view, the language of Rule 65(b)(2) and the great weight of authority support the view that 28 days is the outer limit for a TRO without the consent of the enjoined party, regardless of whether the TRO was issued with or without notice."). Second, and more importantly, pursuant to this Court's 4/15/24 order 14, the TRO expired on 4/24/24. Beyond stating simply that "the Clerk requires an active TRO to issue the Summons," plaintiff has provided no legal authority for a Court to extend a TRO that has already expired. And, on the contrary, certain authority would disagree. See generally, TransFirst Grp., Inc. v. Magliarditi, No. 217CV00487APGVCF, 2017 WL 1158072, at *2 (D.Nev. Mar. 28, 2017) ("I cannot extend the TRO entered by [another Judge] because that TRO expired."); Aerial Adventure Techonologies, LLC v. Naranjo, No. 523CV00018KDBDSC, 2023 WL 4843946, at *1 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 6, 2023) ("[I]t seems obvious to the Court that an expired TRO entered in state court cannot properly be 'extended.'"). Moreover, although a TRO that is extended beyond the 28-day limit becomes in effect a preliminary injunction, see H-D Michigan, 694 F.3d at 844-45, plaintiff failed to seek any such relief here in advance of the expiration of the TRO. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion 18 is denied. The 5/3/24 tracking status hearing is stricken and re-set to 5/31/24 at 9:00 a.m. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| 04/29/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order |
| 04/25/2024 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Angus Setyawan of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 04/05/2024 | SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000 posted by Angus Setyawan (Document not scanned). |
| 04/23/2024 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Angus Setyawan of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 04/15/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Plaintiff's motion for extension of the temporary restraining order 13 is granted. The TRO is extended to 4/24/24. Mailed notice |
| 04/11/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Angus Setyawan for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order |
| 04/04/2024 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by AS of Certain Doe Defendants |
| 03/27/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file excess pages 8 is granted. Plaintiff's motions for leave to file under seal 5 9 are granted in part and denied in part. At a minimum, plaintiff's submissions establish that, were defendants to learn of these proceedings before the execution of plaintiff's requested preliminary injunctive relief, there is a significant risk that defendants could destroy relevant documentary evidence and hide or transfer assets beyond the reach of the Court. Accordingly, subject to unsealing at an appropriate time, plaintiff's request to seal certain documents (set forth in Dckt. #5 and #9) is granted. The temporary restraining order that is being entered contemporaneously with this order will also be placed under seal. Plaintiff's request to proceed under a pseudonym temporarily, however, is denied. As the Seventh Circuit has explained, "We have repeatedly voiced our disfavor of parties proceeding anonymously, as anonymous litigation runs contrary to the rights of the public to have open judicial proceedings and to know who is using court facilities and procedures funded by public taxes. To proceed anonymously, a party must demonstrate exceptional circumstances that outweigh both the public policy in favor of identified parties and the prejudice to the opposing party that would result from anonymity." Doe v. Village of Deerfield, 819 F.3d 372, 376-77 (7th Cir. 2016). Here, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite "exceptional circumstances" to warrant proceeding anonymously under the factual scenario presented by the case, arguing solely without any supporting legal authority that "[p]roceeding pseudonymously. is necessary to prevent the Defendants from learning of these proceedings prior to the execution of the temporary restraining order." (Dckt. #5 at 1). Further, and more importantly, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the safeguards already in place will not otherwise protect its interest in enforcing its rights. See XYZ Corp. v. Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 21-CV-06471, 2022 WL 180151, at *2 (N.D.Ill. Jan. 20, 2022) ("There is insufficient evidence. that Schedule A defendants are taking advantage of the case-tracking option to such an extent that it is materially impeding brand owners' enforcement efforts."). Finally, plaintiff's ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order, asset restraining order, expedited discovery, and service of process by email 6 is granted. The evidence submitted by plaintiff shows a likelihood of success on the merits (including evidence of active infringement and sales into Illinois), that the harm to plaintiff is irreparable, and that an injunction is in the public interest. An injunction serves the public interest because of the consumer confusion caused by counterfeit goods, and there is no countervailing harm to defendants from an order directing them to stop infringement. 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. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and to implement the asset freeze. Enter Sealed Temporary Restraining Order. Status hearing set for 5/3/24 at 9:00 a.m. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| 03/05/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff AS to seal document sealed document, 7 |
| 03/05/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff AS for leave to file excess pages |
| 03/05/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff AS Memorandum in Support of Motion for TRO 附件： 1:Declaration Declaration of Plaintiff 2:Declaration Declaration of David Gulbransen 3:Exhibit Exhibit 1 to Declaration of David Gulbransen 4:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Declaration of David Gulbransen (Part 1 of 5) 5:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Declaration of David Gulbransen (Part 2 of 5) 6:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Declaration of David Gulbransen (Part 3 of 5) 7:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Declaration of David Gulbransen (Part 4 of 5) 8:(Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Declaration of David Gulbransen (Part 5 of 5)) |
| 03/05/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff AS for temporary restraining order |
| 03/05/2024 | 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. |
| 03/05/2024 | CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable David M. Weisman. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3). |
| 03/05/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff AS to seal document sealed document 2 |
| 03/05/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff AS by David Lee Gulbransen, Jr |
| 03/05/2024 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 03/05/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff AS Complaint, Ex. 1, and Schedule A 附件： 1:Exhibit Exhibit 1 2:(Appendix Schedule A) |
| 03/05/2024 | COMPLAINT filed by AS; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-21708872. |
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
