2024-cv-00099

COMPLAINT filed by Howard Robinson; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-21485683.

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

(Exhibit 4)

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Howard Robinson Schedule A to Complaint 1

CIVIL Cover Sheet

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Howard Robinson by Keith A. Vogt

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Howard Robinson by Yanling Jiang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Howard Robinson by Yi Bu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Howard Robinson by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Howard Robinson by Cameron Eugene Mcintyre

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Howard Robinson by Monica Rita Martin

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Howard Robinson by Christopher Romero

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3).

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.

MOTION by Plaintiff Howard Robinson for leave to file under seal

MOTION by Plaintiff Howard Robinson for leave to file excess pages

MEMORANDUM in support of 13 Exparte motion

Declaration of Keith A. Vogt

Exhibit 1-4, of Keith A. Vogt's declaration

Declaration of Howard Robinson

(Exhibit 1, of Howard Robinson's declaration)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Howard Robinson Sealed Exhibit 2, Declaration of Howard Robinson regarding memorandum in support of motion, 14

(Exhibit 2-1)

MAILED Copyrights report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA

((List of Copyrights))

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: For the reasons set forth in the motions 11, 12, 13 filed by plaintiff Howard Robinson, the supporting memorandum 14, and the temporary restraining order, plaintiff's motions for leave to file certain documents under seal 11, for leave to file excess pages 12, and for a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, expedited discovery, and electronic service of process 13 are granted. Plaintiff's filings support proceeding (for the time being) on an ex parte basis. Specifically, 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 accounting. In addition, the evidence submitted by plaintiff shows a substantial likelihood of success on the merits (including evidence of active infringement and the offering of products for sale into Illinois), the harm to plaintiff is irreparable, and an injunction is in the public interest. 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 other judges in this district have noted, there may be reason to question the propriety of the joinder of all defendants in this one action, but at this preliminary stage, plaintiff has provided sufficient evidence of coordinated activity 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 revisit the asset freeze and joinder. Plaintiff shall deposit with the Clerk of Court ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), either cash or surety bond, as security.

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 1/23/2024:

SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000 posted by Howard Robinson (Document not scanned.)

MOTION by Plaintiff Howard Robinson for preliminary injunction

MEMORANDUM by Howard Robinson in support of motion for preliminary injunction 20

Declaration of Keith A. Vogt

(Exhibit 1, Declaration of Keith Vogt)

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Howard Robinson as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 1/30/2024, answer due 2/20/2024.

(Declaration of Service, Keith A. Vogt)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's motion for entry of a preliminary injunction 20. The court has taken the motion for preliminary injunction 20 under advisement and will consider the motion unopposed if no defendant appears and objects by 2/28/2024. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff Howard Robinson for default judgment as to Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default and Default Judgment Against the Defendants Identified in First Amended Schedule A

MEMORANDUM by Howard Robinson in support of motion for default judgment 24

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

(Declaration of Keith A. Vogt)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's motion for default judgment 24. The court will take the motion under advisement and will consider it unopposed if defendants do not appear and object by 3/4/2024. Plaintiff shall promptly serve defendants with this notice and file a certificate of service on the docket.

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Howard Robinson regarding set motion and R&R deadlines/hearings, 26

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Maydear, BSNTHO-HOME by Adam Edward Urbanczyk

MOTION by Defendants BSNTHO-HOME, Maydear for extension of time

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The motion for extension of time filed by defendants Maydear and BSNTHO-HOME [29] is granted. Defendants should answer or otherwise respond to plaintiff's complaint by 3/21/24.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs as to [Certain] defendants

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal [41], which seeks to voluntarily dismiss several defendants under Rule 41(a)(1). But Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dismissing some, but not all, parties to an action. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) ("Rule 41(a) should be limited to dismissal of an entire action."). The court therefore construes plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by removing the listed defendants from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff should file the amended Schedule A form on the docket by 3/15/24. Additionally, the court notes that plaintiff submitted a proposed default judgment order to the court's proposed order inbox, which excludes the defendants plaintiff seeks leave to dismiss [31] and also excludes defendant No. 3, MAYDEAR, an appearing defendant that plaintiff has not sought leave to dismiss. By 3/15/24, plaintiff should also file a status report addressing how plaintiff seeks to proceed against defendant No. 3, MAYDEAR. If plaintiff seeks to proceed to a default judgment against only some of the defendants in this suit, plaintiff's status report must address in detail the propriety of doing so. See Frow v. De La Vega, 82 U.S. 552 (1872); Arwa Chiropractic, P.C. v. Med-Care Diabetic and Medical Supplies, Inc., 961 F.3d 942, 950-952 (7th Cir. 2020); VLM Food Trading Int'l, Inc. v. Illinois Trading Co., 811 F.3d 247, 256 n.6 (7th Cir. 2016); Marshall & Ilsley Trust Co. v. Pate, 819 F.2d 806, 811-12 (7th Cir. 1987); In re Uranium Antitrust Litig., 617 F.2d 1248, 1257-58 (7th Cir. 1980); Krakow Bus. Park v. Locke Lord, LLP, 135 F. Supp. 3d 770, 783 (N.D. Ill. 2015), aff'd sub nom. Domanus v. Locke Lord LLP, 847 F.3d 469 (7th Cir. 2017).

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs as to Defendant no. 36 Liaocheng Lubinghua Electronic Commerce Co., Ltd. and no. 92 xiangchengshiniumishangmaoyouxiangongsi

STIPULATION of Dismissal Joint Stipulation of Dismissal as to Defendant no. 3 MAYDEAR

Amended Schedule A [2] by Howard Robinson

STATUS Report Pursuant to [32] by Howard Robinson

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal [33] and the stipulation of dismissal filed by plaintiff and defendant No. 3 MAYDEAR [34], which seek to voluntarily dismiss several defendants under Rule 41(a)(1). But Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dismissing some, but not all, parties to an action. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) ("Rule 41(a) should be limited to dismissal of an entire action."). The court therefore construes plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal and the stipulation of dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by removing the listed defendants from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff has already filed the amended Schedule A form on the docket [35]. Defendants Liaocheng Lubinghua Electronic Commerce Co., Ltd, xiangchengshiniumishangmaoyouxiangongsi are dismissed without prejudice. Defendant Maydear is dismissed with prejudice with each party to bear its own attorneys' fees, costs and expenses.

ORDER: No defendant has responded to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment [24]. 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 $100,000 per defendant, and that a permanent injunction should be entered. Plaintiff has shown that the infringement of plaintiff's copyrights causes plaintiff 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 dollars ($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 Keith Vogt Ltd., 33 West Jackson Boulevard, #2W, Chicago, Illinois, 60604, via certified mail. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction [20] is denied as moot. Enter Default Final Judgment Order. Terminate civil case. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 3/18/2024:Mailed notice.

DEFAULT FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER: Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 3/18/2024: Mailed notice.

MAILED copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC

MAILED surety bond posted by Plaintiff to plaintiff's counsel Keith Vogt Ltd., 33 West Jackson Boulevard, #2W, Chicago, Illinois, 60604, sent certified, article number 70012510000576817396.