2023-cv-15273

COMPLAINT filed by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-21254810.

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

(Exhibit 4)

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited Schedule A to Complaint 1

CIVIL Cover Sheet

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited by Keith A. Vogt

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited by Yanling Jiang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited by Yi Bu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited by Cameron Eugene Mcintyre

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited by Monica Rita Martin

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2).

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 Pink Floyd (1987) Limited for leave to file under seal

MOTION by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited 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 Thomas Schlegel

(Exhibit 1, of Thomas Schlegel's declaration)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited Sealed Exhibit 2, Declaration of Thomas Schlegel regarding memorandum in support of motion, 14

Exhibit 2-1

Exhibit 2-2

Exhibit 2-3

Exhibit 2-4

(Exhibit 2-5)

MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited's motions for leave to file under seal 11 and for leave to file excess pages 12 are granted. Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, and expedited discovery, and electronic service of process, 13 is granted for the reasons set forth in plaintiff's supporting memorandum 14 and exhibits 15. 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. Plaintiff's proffered evidence of defendants' active infringement and sales into Illinois shows a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; the harm to plaintiff is irreparable; and the injunction is in the public interest. Electronic service of process does not violate any treaty and is consistent with due process because it would effectively communicate 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 against 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 11/9/2023:

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

SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000 posted by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited. (Document not Scanned)

MOTION by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited for extension of time for Temporary Restraining Order

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's ex parte motion to extend the TRO 20 is granted. Under Rule 65(b)(2), the court finds good cause to extend the TRO for an additional 14 days to prevent defendants from modifying registration data and content, changing hosts, redirecting traffic to other websites in their control, and moving any assets from accounts in U.S.-based financial institutions, including service provider accounts, to offshore accounts. The court's TRO 18 entered on 11/9/23 is extended until 12/7/23.

MOTION by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited for preliminary injunction

MEMORANDUM by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited in support of motion for preliminary injunction 22

Declaration of Keith A. Vogt

(Exhibit 1, of Keith A. Vogt's declaration)

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 12/1/2023, answer due 12/22/2023.

(Declaration of Service)

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited as to Defendant No. 22 Bigfinz

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's motion for entry of a preliminary injunction 22. The court has taken the motion for preliminary injunction 22 under advisement and will consider the motion unopposed if no defendant appears and objects by 12/20/23. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice and file a certificate of service. For the reasons stated in the Court's orders entering and extending the TRO, as well as in plaintiff's memorandum in support of plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction 23, 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.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal 25, which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendant No. 22 Bigfinz. 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 defendant No. 22 Bigfinz 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 by 12/12/23 identifying the remaining defendants.

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited regarding set motion and R&R deadlines/hearings, 26

Amended Schedule A 2 by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited as to [Certain] Defendants

Amended Schedule A 2 by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal 30, which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendant No. 22 Bigfinz. 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 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 identifying the remaining defendants 31.

FILED PRO SE by Erynn Woodward and only in defense of myself, my designs, and my 'storefront' on the TeePublic website. (Exhibits)

DECLARATION of Phillip J. Morledge, HellwoodOutfitters Sole Proprietorship Status (HellwoodOutfitters,)

APPEARANCE Pro Se by HellwoodOutfitters (HellwoodOutfitters,)

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs Aas to defendant no. 90 HellwoodOutfitters

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited as to [Certain] Defendants

Amended Schedule A 2 by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited

PRO SE Appearance by Defendant Ibone Garcia.

RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion to enter preliminary injunction, and Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction filed by Defendant Ibone Garcia.

MOTION by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited 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 Pink Floyd (1987) Limited in support of motion for default judgment 41

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

(Declaration of Keith A. Vogt)

STATEMENT by Blue Box, The. (Exhibits) (Envelope postmark 12/14/2023)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notices of dismissal 35, 36, which seek to voluntarily dismiss defendants No. 90 HellwoodOutfiggers and No. 149 ohlapislazuli along with about 230 others. 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 notices of voluntary dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by removing 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 an amended Schedule A identifying the remaining defendants 37.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: In light of plaintiff's amendment of the Schedule A, defendant no. 149 ohlapislazuli's, or Ibone Garcia's, motion to dismiss and opposition 40 in opposition to plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction 22 is stricken as moot.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff is directed to file an updated proposed preliminary injunction order, redline and clean, to the proposed order box by 1/10/24.

ANNUAL REMINDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 (Notification of Affiliates), any nongovernmental party, other than an individual or sole proprietorship, must file a statement identifying all its affiliates known to the party after diligent review or, if the party has identified no affiliates, then a statement reflecting that fact must be filed. An affiliate is defined as follows: any entity or individual owning, directly or indirectly (through ownership of one or more other entities), 5% or more of a party. The statement is to be electronically filed as a PDF in conjunction with entering the affiliates in CM/ECF as prompted. As a reminder to counsel, parties must supplement their statements of affiliates within thirty (30) days of any change in the information previously reported. This minute order is being issued to all counsel of record to remind counsel of their obligation to provide updated information as to additional affiliates if such updating is necessary. If counsel has any questions regarding this process, this LINK will provide additional information. Signed by the Executive Committee on 12/28/2023: Mailed notice.

PRO SE Appearance by Defendant Mohamed Nasser-allah.

DEFENDANT No. 53 - RESPONSE DUOFILMO'S Response in opposition to Moiton to enter preliminary injunction, and opposition to motion for default judgment and defendants motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

DECLARATION OF Mohamed Nasser-allah.

EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT of Motion to enter preliminary injunction, and opposition to motion for default judgement and defendants motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction filed by Defendant No. 53-DUOFILMO. (Exhibits)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Any defendant objecting to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment 41 must enter an appearance and file a written objection by 1/31/2024. 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: Plaintiff is directed to send an updated proposed default judgment order, redline and clean, to the proposed order box by 1/31/2024.

MOTION by Plaintiff Pink Floyd (1987) Limited to stay regarding Response 51

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Defendant No. 53, Duofilmo, filed a response in opposition to motion to enter preliminary injunction and opposition to motion for default judgment, and motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. 51. Plaintiff then filed a motion to stay 54, in which plaintiff requests a stay of defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and an opportunity to conduct jurisdictional discovery. Plaintiff's motion to stay 54 is granted in that the court grants the request for jurisdictional discovery and stays briefing on the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction pending the completion of jurisdictional discovery. The parties should file a joint status report within 7 days of the completion of jurisdictional discovery proposing a briefing schedule on Duofilmo's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction 51.

Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: discovery supervision and scheduling (including jurisdictional discovery), to set a deadline to file amended pleadings, to set a dispositive motions schedule, and for settlement.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling: This matter has been referred to Judge Holleb Hotaling for discovery supervision (including jurisdictional discovery), settlement, to set a deadline to file amended pleadings, and to set a dispositive motions schedule. The District Court has already granted Plaintiff's request for jurisdictional discovery [Dkt. 55]. By 2/7/2024, the parties are to file a joint status report setting forth a deadline for the completion of jurisdictional discovery, and a statement regarding whether the parties are interested in a settlement conference (either as to all or fewer Defendants).

STATUS Report Joint Status Report by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited Presented before Magistrate Judge

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling: The Court hereby adopts the following jurisdictional discovery schedule proposed by the parties [see Dkt. 58]. The Parties shall exchange Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures by March 8, 2024. The Parties shall serve written discovery by March 18, 2024. Written discovery is to be completed by May 20, 2024. Depositions of fact witnesses shall be completed by September 16, 2024. The parties are to file a joint status report on 9/20/2024 setting forth a proposed expert discovery schedule, if any, related to jurisdictional discovery. If no expert jurisdictional discovery is needed, the parties are to propose a dispositive motion schedule at that time, or, alternatively, propose a fact discovery schedule if the parties wish to wait on dispositive motions. Additionally, the parties indicate they are interested in a settlement conference. The parties should still proceed with jurisdictional discovery while they await a settlement conference with Judge Holleb Hotaling. Judge Holleb Hotaling sets an off-the-record pre-settlement conference telephone call for 2/21/2024 at 10:00 a.m. CST. All parties who wish to participate in the conference should call in at this time. The parties should ensure they call in ONLY at their designated time and not earlier to ensure the pre-settlement call remains private (but not on the record). The counsel that appears for this pre-settlement telephone discussion must be counsel who will represent their respective clients at the conference, or are able to discuss the issues of the case and to schedule the conference on behalf of their clients. The Court expects counsel to discuss issues in the case that may affect the settlement process. Counsel should review Judge Holleb Hotaling's Standing Order on Settlement Conferences prior to the call. The call in information is 888-684-8852 and the passcode is 3214701.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling:Off-the-record pre-settlement conference held on 2/21/2024. The parties have reached a settlement in principle. A continued off-the-record settlement conference call is set for 3/6/2024 at 10:00 a.m. via WebEx. The WebEx invitation will be sent to the parties closer to the 03/06/2024 settlement conference call date.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling: Off-the-record further settlement conference with Plaintiff and the remaining Defendant held on 3/6/2024. The parties are effectuating their settlement. A continued off-the-record settlement conference call is set for 4/24/2024 at 10:00 a.m. via WebEx. The continued call will be stricken if Plaintiff's counsel notifies the Court sufficiently in advance of that date that the settlement has been effectuated. Plaintiff's counsel shall ensure that Defendant is provided with notice as well. The WebEx invitation will be sent to the parties closer to the 4/24/2024 settlement conference call date.

STIPULATION of Dismissal as to Defendant No. 53 Duofilmo

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Joint stipulation of dismissal 62 seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendant No. 53 Duofilmo. 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 the parties joint stipulation of dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by removing defendants from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. By 4/26/2024, plaintiff should file an amended Schedule A separately on the docket and file a status report on the status of pending motions and how plaintiff seeks to proceed with the case.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling: Pursuant to the parties' stipulation of dismissal [Dkt. 62], all matters relating to the referral of this action are complete. The continued off-the-record settlement conference call set for 4/24/2024 is stricken. Referral terminated.

Amended Schedule A 2 by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited

STATUS Report Pursuant to 63 by Pink Floyd (1987) Limited

ORDER: No remaining defendant has responded to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment 41. The motion 41 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 $250,000 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 remaining 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 Vogt, Ltd., 33 West Jackson Boulevard Unit #2W, Chicago, IL 60604, via certified mail. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction 22 is denied as moot. Enter Default Judgment Order. Terminate civil case. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 4/26/2024. Mailed notice.

DEFAULT FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 4/26/2024. Mailed notice.

MAILED trademark report, along with a certified copy of the order dated 4/26/24, to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA

RETURN of U.S. Post Office Receipt, article no. 7001 2510 0005 7681 6559