最近更新：2024-12-25
2022-cv-00604
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 05/17/2023 | FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 43 in the amount of the Judgment Amount as to certain defendant |
| 08/12/2022 | NOTICE of Removal Material from the Custody of the Clerk's Office by Justin R. Gaudio of the firm Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. by the Plaintiff regarding Bond 25. (Received for Docketing on 9/27/2022) |
| 07/28/2022 | FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 7/28/2022: Mailed notice |
| 07/28/2022 | ORDER Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 7/28/2022:Mailed notice |
| 07/18/2022 | CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. regarding order on motion for entry of default, order on motion for default judgment, terminate deadlines and hearings, set deadlines, 40 附件： 1:(Exhibit 1) |
| 07/18/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion 37 for entry of default and for a default judgment against all Defendants. All remaining defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. Accordingly, 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 7/27/2022. If no objections are filed by that date, the motion for default judgment will be considered unopposed. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining Defendants within two business days of its entry on the docket and must file proof of service within three business of service being effected. Mailed notice |
| 07/07/2022 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 38 附件： 1:(Exhibit 1) |
| 07/07/2022 | MEMORANDUM by Oakley, Inc. in support of motion for entry of default, motion for default judgment 37 附件： 1:(Exhibit 1) |
| 07/07/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for entry of default as to all Defendants, MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for default judgment as to all Defendants 附件： 1:(Exhibit A) |
| 06/16/2022 | NEW PARTIES: KUWOMAX Store, Shop5778462 Store, Jarvan V Store, feique Store, Calsas Store, zhuoying002 Store, TRIUMPH VISION Official Store, D&TCOOLFLY Store, Shop5879549 Store, Shop910335181 Store, Shop910564183 Store, Homer SportsEntertainment Store, damai1234, cangeriyongbaihuojingyingbu, junhfopw, JVEGE, Bingbingbianlichaoshi, junbindianzishangwu, YPSMWXG, shuaiyour, ZHANGQIAO-US, ghuijorjyj0654, lucky birds, Jopokh Becky and gobike88 added to case caption. |
| 06/08/2022 | PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 6/8/2022. Mailed notice |
| 06/08/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 28 is granted. Plaintiff's filings establish that Plaintiff 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 32 that it provided electronic notice to defendants of the pendency of this case and provided a link to a website containing relevant case documents, but, despite the Court having provided 31 the opportunity to do so, no Defendant has objected to the motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiff's counsel is directed to ensure that all defendants listed on Schedule A are added to the docket within five business days. The Clerk is requested to unseal any previously-sealed documents. Mailed notice |
| 05/16/2022 | STATEMENT by Cynthia's Merchant by Xiaoping Liu. (Exhibits, Envelope priority mail) |
| 05/13/2022 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Oakley, Inc. as to certain defendant |
| 04/29/2022 | CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. regarding order on motion for preliminary injunction, order on motion for extension of time, terminate deadlines and hearings, set deadlines, 31 附件： 1:(Exhibit 1) |
| 04/29/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion 28 for entry of a preliminary injunction. In connection with that motion, which is entered and continued, Plaintiff must serve all 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 on or before 5/5/2022." Plaintiff must file proof of service of the Court's statement within two business days of service. For the reasons stated in the Court's orders 21 22 27 entering and extending the TRO, as well as in Plaintiff's earlier motion 24 to extend the TRO, the TRO is further extended to and including the date on which the Court adjudicates the motion for a preliminary injunction. See H-D Mich., LLC v. Hellenic Duty Free Shops S.A., 694 F.3d 827, 843-45 (7th Cir. 2012). Because this extension exceeds the maximum duration for a TRO under FRCP 65(b), this extension "becomes in effect a preliminary injunction that is appealable, but the order remains effective." Id. at 844. Mailed notice |
| 04/25/2022 | SUMMONS Returned Executed by Oakley, Inc. as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A" on 4/25/2022, answer due 5/16/2022. 附件： 1:Declaration of Thomas J. Juettner 2:Exhibit A |
| 04/25/2022 | MEMORANDUM by Oakley, Inc. in support of motion for preliminary injunction, extension of time[28] 附件： 1:Declaration of Jake M. Christensen 2:Exhibit 1 |
| 04/25/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for preliminary injunction, MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order 附件： 1:Exhibit A |
| 04/19/2022 | SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A" |
| 04/18/2022 | EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 4/18/2022. Mailed notice |
| 04/18/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's Motion for for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order [23] is granted. Enter separate order. Mailed notice |
| 04/13/2022 | SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000 posted by Oakley, Inc. |
| 04/13/2022 | MEMORANDUM by Oakley, Inc. in support of extension of time 23 附件： 1:(Declaration of Jake M. Christensen) |
| 04/13/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order |
| 04/04/2022 | SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 4/4/2022 |
| 04/04/2022 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal 4, ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order and other relief 13, and motion for electronic service of process 18 are granted in part. Plaintiff's submissions, including the Declaration 16 of Jason Groppe, 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 may for now file under seal the documents identified in the motion to seal and appearing at docket entries 2, 3, and 17. The Temporary Restraining Order being entered along with this minute order shall also be placed under seal. In addition, for the purpose of the motions cited above, Plaintiff's filings support proceeding (for the time being) on an ex parte basis under FRCP 65(b)(1). Specifically, and as noted above, were defendants to be informed of this proceeding before a TRO could issue, it is likely assets and websites would be redirected, thus defeating Plaintiff's interests in identifying defendants, stopping Defendants' infringing conduct, and obtaining an equitable accounting. In addition, the Court finds, at least for now on this limited and one-sided record and without prejudice to revisiting the issue, that it has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because they directly target their business activities toward consumers in the United States, including Illinois. Specifically, Defendants have targeted sales to Illinois residents by setting up and operating e-commerce stores that target United States consumers using one or more Seller Aliases, offer shipping to the United States, including Illinois, accept payment in U.S. dollars, and have sold products using infringing and counterfeit versions of Plaintiff's patented goods to residents of Illinois. The evidence presented to the Court also shows that Plaintiff has demonstrated 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. As this Court and others have noted, there may be reason to question both the propriety of the joinder of all Defendants in this one action and whether plaintiff will pursue an accounting (which Plaintiff asserts as justification for an asset freeze), but at this preliminary stage, the court is persuaded that Plaintiff has provided sufficient evidence of coordinated activity and the prospect of an accounting to justify the requested relief as to all Defendants. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and to implement the asset freeze. If any defendant appears and objects, the court will reconsider the asset freeze and joinder. Enter Sealed Temporary Restraining Order. Mailed notice |
| 02/09/2022 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 19 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 2:(Exhibit 2) |
| 02/09/2022 | MEMORANDUM by Oakley, Inc. in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 18 |
| 02/09/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3) |
| 02/09/2022 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. Exhibit 2 regarding declaration 16 |
| 02/09/2022 | DECLARATION of Jason Groppe regarding memorandum in support of motion 14 附件： 1:(Exhibit 1) |
| 02/09/2022 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 14 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 2:(Exhibit 2) |
| 02/09/2022 | MEMORANDUM by Oakley, Inc. in support of motion for temporary restraining order 13 |
| 02/09/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for temporary restraining order Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery |
| 02/04/2022 | MAILED patent report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA |
| 02/03/2022 | 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. |
| 02/03/2022 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. by Thomas Joseph Juettner |
| 02/03/2022 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. by Jake Michael Christensen |
| 02/03/2022 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. by Amy Crout Ziegler |
| 02/03/2022 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. by Justin R. Gaudio |
| 02/03/2022 | Notice of Claims Involving Patents by Oakley, Inc. |
| 02/03/2022 | NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Oakley, Inc. |
| 02/03/2022 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 02/03/2022 | MOTION by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. for leave to file under seal |
| 02/03/2022 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. Exhibit 1 regarding complaint[1] |
| 02/03/2022 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. Schedule A regarding complaint[1] |
| 02/03/2022 | COMPLAINT filed by Oakley, Inc.; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-19119597. 附件： 1:Exhibit 2 2:Exhibit 3 3:Exhibit 4 4:Exhibit 5 |
