2025-cv-22727

COMPLAINT against The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A. Filing fees $ 405.00 receipt number AFLSDC-18540965, filed by Atari Interactive, Inc.

(Exhibit Civil Cover Sheet)

Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Roy K. Altman. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Enjolique A. Lett is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent.

FORM AO 120 SENT TO DIRECTOR OF U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK

Complaint

Corporate Disclosure Statement by Atari Interactive, Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Atari SA for Atari Interactive, Inc.

MOTION for Leave to File Under Seal by Atari Interactive, Inc.

Text of Proposed Order

Clerk's Notice to Filer re 5 MOTION for Leave to File Under Seal. Filer Selected the Wrong Motion Relief(s); ERROR - The Filer selected the wrong motion relief(s) when docketing the motion. The correction was made by the Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document but future motions filed must include applicable reliefs.

ORDER in Cases with Multiple Defendants. Signed by Judge Roy K. Altman on 6/25/2025. See attached document for full details.

OMNIBUS ORDER REGARDING SCHEDULE "A" CAUSES OF ACTION. Responses due by 7/9/2025. Signed by Judge Roy K. Altman on 6/25/2025. See attached document for full details.

AMENDED COMPLAINT against HAODONGDONGDEXIAODIAN, filed by Atari Interactive, Inc.

Exhibit 1

Plaintiff's RESPONSE to [8] Order on Motion to Seal and Omnibus Order Regarding Schedule "A" Causes of Action Paragraph 2 by Atari Interactive, Inc.

Clerk's Notice to Filer re 9 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal. Parties Not Added; ERROR - The Filer failed to add all parties from the complaint/petition/removal, etc. Filer is instructed to file a Notice of Entry of Parties Listed into CM/ECF and add the additional parties.

Notice of Entry of Parties Listed NOTE: New Filer(s) will appear twice, since they are also a new party in the case. New Filer(s)/Party(s): The Individuals and Entities Operating HAODONGDONGDEXIAODIAN.

Exhibit 1

PAPERLESS ORDER STRIKING the Individuals and Entities Operating haodongdongdexiaodian identified on Schedule A from the 9 Amended Complaint. The Amended Complaint names "the Individuals and Entities Operating haodongdongdexiaodian identified on Schedule A" as Defendants--this, in addition to the Defendant haodongdongdexiaodian. Am. Compl. at 1. But only "haodongdongdexiaodian" is listed on Schedule A. Id. at 18. And the Plaintiff doesn't tell us anything about the "individuals and business entities" operating haodongdongdexiaodian--other than that they're of "unknown makeup" and "own and/or operate the e-commerce store under the Seller Alias identified on Schedule A and/or other seller aliases not yet known to Plaintiff." Id. at 8. That won't do. This is just another form of "fictitious-party pleading," which "is not permitted in federal court." Richardson v. Johnson, 598 F.3d 734, 738 (11th Cir. 2010); accord Dumond v. Miami-Dade Police Dep't, 2022 WL 17736204, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 16, 2022) (Ruiz, J.) ("The Court warns Plaintiff, however, that a claim against a group of unknown or unidentifiable police officers (otherwise known as 'fictious-party pleading') is not permitted in federal court." (cleaned up)). The only exception to this rule arises "when the plaintiff's description of the defendant is so specific as to be 'at the very worst, surplusage.'" Richardson, 598 F.3d at 738 (quoting Dean v. Barber, 951 F.2d 1210, 1215-16 (11th Cir. 1992)). To qualify for this exception, though, "the plaintiff's description of the defendant must be so specific that the party may be identified for service even though his actual name is unknown." Barnett v. Pretrial Det. Ctr., 2023 WL 5176298, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 11, 2023) (Altonaga, C.J.) (cleaned up). That's not what's happening here. The Plaintiff provides no identifying details about these other Defendants, other than that they "may reside and/or operate" in China or other "foreign jurisdictions[.]" Am. Compl. at 8. Nor does the Plaintiff claim that these Defendants will be identified through discovery or otherwise. In fact, the Plaintiff tells us it's "virtually impossible" to discover the Defendants' "true identities and the exact interworking of their network" unless the Defendants themselves "provide additional credible information regarding their identities[.]" Ibid. Since the Plaintiff's descriptions are not "so specific as to be at the very worst, surplusage," Richardson, 598 F.3d at 738 (cleaned up), its claims against these fictious-party defendants must be dismissed. We therefore DIRECT the Clerk to remove these Defendants from the Docket. The Plaintiff shall proceed against the individual Defendant haodongdongdexiaodian only. Signed by Judge Roy K. Altman on 7/13/2025. (rr01)