2023-cv-03752

COMPLAINT filed by Jeff Bartels; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-20735430.

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

(Exhibit 4)

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Jeff Bartels Schedule A to Complaint (1)

CIVIL Cover Sheet

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jeff Bartels by Keith A. Vogt

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jeff Bartels by Yanling Jiang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jeff Bartels by Yi Bu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jeff Bartels by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jeff Bartels by Cameron Eugene Mcintyre

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Heather K. McShain. Case assignment: Random assignment.

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 Jeff Bartels for leave to file [Certain] Documents Under Seal

MOTION by Plaintiff Jeff Bartels for leave to file excess pages

MEMORANDUM In Support of 11 Ex Parte Motion

Declaration of Keith A. Vogt

Exhibit 1-4, Declaration of Keith Vogt

Declaration of Jeff Bartels

(Exhibit 1, Declaration of Jeff Bartels)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Jeff Bartels Sealed Exhibit 2, Declaration of Jeff Bartels regarding memorandum in support of motion 12

Exhibit 2, Part 1

(Exhibit 2, Part 2)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: For the reasons set forth in plaintiff's motions (9, 10, 11), the supporting memorandum (12) and the temporary restraining order, plaintiff's motions for leave to file under seal 9, for leave to file excess pages 10, and for a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, expedited discovery, and service of process by email and/or electronic publication 11 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 sales 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 both the propriety of the joinder of all defendants in this one action and whether plaintiff genuinely intends to pursue an accounting, but at this preliminary stage, 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 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 6/16/2023:

MAILED copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC

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

SURETY BOND in the amount of $10,000.00 posted by Jeff Bartels (Document not scanned)

MOTION by Plaintiff Jeff Bartels for preliminary injunction

MEMORANDUM by Jeff Bartels in support of motion for preliminary injunction 18

Declaration of Keith A. Vogt

(Exhibit 1, Declaration of Keith Vogt)

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Jeff Bartels as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 6/22/2023, answer due 7/13/2023.

(Declaration of Service)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has taken the motion for a preliminary injunction 18 under advisement and will consider the motion unopposed if no defendant appears and objects by 6/30/2023. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice. Mailed notice

MOTION by Plaintiff Jeff Bartels for default judgment as to The Defendants Identified In The First Amended Schedule A

MEMORANDUM by Jeff Bartels in support of motion for default judgment 22

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

(Declaration of Keith A. Vogt)

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants YMIX, One DORA, GUANGZHOU JINGBOSHENG TRADE CO., LTD by Adam Edward Urbanczyk

MOTION by Defendants GUANGZHOU JINGBOSHENG TRADE CO., LTD, One DORA, YMIX for extension of time

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants UGOcase, Cookk, Apoll by Depeng Bi

MOTION by Defendants Apoll, Cookk, UGOcase for extension of time to file answer

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Any defendant objecting to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment [22] must enter an appearance and file a written objection by 7/26/2023. If no objections are filed, the court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Defendants Apoll, Cookk, and UGOcases's motion for an extension of time [27] is granted. Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by 8/31/2023.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Defendants YMIX, One DORA, and GUANGZHOU JINGBOSHENG TRADE CO., LTD's motion for extension of time [25] is granted. Defendants to answer or otherwise plead to the complaint by 8/7/2023.

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

Order Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 7/24/2023: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal [31], which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendants No. 129 WB WEIRDBEAST; No. 185 Viandaiz; No. 35 kaurw; No. 110 Nannxiebky; No. 175 Bbhhe; No. 30 NBXNZWF; No. 104 Ounsoong; No. 38 DONNA HOME; No. 33 FMCHICO; No. 188 SkyTown Store; No. 189 '"'; No. 108 Viclowlpfe; No. 120 Dluggs; No. 11 keyilu; No. 117 COLSALE; No. 12 JASME; No. 19 Gloneld; No. 24 Gubotare; No. 193 FHSMYXGS; No. 75 Fancity; No. 107 AKHIOK; No. 31 SOLAWE; No. 23 UNEAO; No. 200 Kzxsfy; No. 2 JINMGG Womens Fashion Store; No. 114 SHUBOWN; No. 155 SUNKOO Direct; No. 68 pudiceva; No. 191 Yun Chen Clothing 7-15 delivery; No. 63 Ayotu Mall-US; No. 96 Yunoble; No. 72 APOLL; No. 91 UGOcase; No. 92 Cookk; No. 64 HAHAZJ; No. 15 Aiungou; No. 14 One DORA; No. 26 GUANGZHOU JINGBOSHENG TRADE CO., LTD; No. 59 Dzmengj Store; and No. 97 LIZPARE 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 defendants No. 129 WB WEIRDBEAST; No. 185 Viandaiz; No. 35 kaurw; No. 110 Nannxiebky; No. 175 Bbhhe; No. 30 NBXNZWF; No. 104 Ounsoong; No. 38 DONNA HOME; No. 33 FMCHICO; No. 188 SkyTown Store; No. 189 '"'; No. 108 Viclowlpfe; No. 120 Dluggs; No. 11 keyilu; No. 117 COLSALE; No. 12 JASME; No. 19 Gloneld; No. 24 Gubotare; No. 193 FHSMYXGS; No. 75 Fancity; No. 107 AKHIOK; No. 31 SOLAWE; No. 23 UNEAO; No. 200 Kzxsfy; No. 2 JINMGG Womens Fashion Store; No. 114 SHUBOWN; No. 155 SUNKOO Direct; No. 68 pudiceva; No. 191 Yun Chen Clothing 7-15 delivery; No. 63 Ayotu Mall-US; No. 96 Yunoble; No. 72 APOLL; No. 91 UGOcase; No. 92 Cookk; No. 64 HAHAZJ; No. 15 Aiungou; No. 14 One DORA; No. 26 GUANGZHOU JINGBOSHENG TRADE CO., LTD; No. 59 Dzmengj Store; and No. 97 LIZPARE from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff is directed to file an amended Schedule A form by 7/28/2023 identifying the remaining defendants.

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

Amended Schedule A [2] by Jeff Bartels

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal [33], which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendants No. 16 KONDRAWI MAZZ; No. 43 Lorto Org; No. 141 Hight speed; No. 137 Feadge; No. 159 DUADELI; No. 101 enoxboo; No. 119 amn-cqq; No. 133 JMH-JP; No. 154 CTG-JP; No. 170 winlejoice; No. 105 YOUHUBUY; No. 73 Sunshare; and No. 153 PRICETAIL 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 defendants No. 16 KONDRAWI MAZZ; No. 43 Lorto Org; No. 141 Hight speed; No. 137 Feadge; No. 159 DUADELI; No. 101 enoxboo; No. 119 amn-cqq; No. 133 JMH-JP; No. 154 CTG-JP; No. 170 winlejoice; No. 105 YOUHUBUY; No. 73 Sunshare; and No. 153 PRICETAIL 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 an amended Schedule A form on the docket [34].

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The parties should file a status report by 8/15/2023 on the status of remaining defendants, the status of settlement discussions, and how the parties seek to proceed with this case.

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

Amended Schedule A [2] by Jeff Bartels

STATUS Report Pursuant to Minute Entry Order [36] by Jeff Bartels

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal [37], which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendants No. 94 YMIX; No. 18 wenshanshilangshidechunjingshebeijingyingbu; and No. 161 Rudofu 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 defendants No. 94 YMIX; No. 18 wenshanshilangshidechunjingshebeijingyingbu; and No. 161 Rudofu 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 an amended Schedule A form separately on the docket [38].

ORDER: No defendant has responded to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment [22]. 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 $50,000 per defendant, and that a permanent injunction should be entered. Plaintiff has shown that the infringement of its marks causes it 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 dollar ($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 A. Vogt, Keith Vogt, Ltd., 33 West Jackson Boulevard, Unit #2W, Chicago, IL 60604, via certified mail. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction [18] is denied as moot. Enter Final Judgment Order. Terminate civil case. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 8/18/2023: Mailed notice

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 8/18/2023: Mailed notice

MAILED out the ten thousand dollars ($10,000) surety bond posted by Plaintiff to Keith A. Vogt, via Certified Mail Receipt Article Number: 7019 2280 0000 0962 9405.

RETURN of U.S. Post Office Receipt, article no. 7019 2280 0000 0962 9405.

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 13 Kansopa

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 128 MaiKaiChen and no. 47 FlyweightZ

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs as to Defendant no. 77 Melifluo and no. 140 Arystk

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 10 HongJIaasd(7-18 day Delivery) and no. 139 Jottier

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 29 Eugenelo

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 109 iDOMi