2024-cv-00688

COMPLAINT filed by Nike, Inc.; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-21570400.

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

(Exhibit 4)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. Schedule A regarding complaint 1

MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for leave to file under seal

CIVIL Cover Sheet

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Nike, Inc.

Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Nike, Inc.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. by Justin R. Gaudio

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. by Amy Crout Ziegler

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. by Marcella Deshonda Slay

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Nike, Inc. by Berel Yonathan Lakovitsky

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.

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John F. Kness. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Beth W. Jantz. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2).

MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for temporary restraining order Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery

MEMORANDUM by Nike, Inc. in support of motion for temporary restraining order 11

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 12

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

(Exhibit 4)

DECLARATION of Joe Pallett regarding memorandum in support of motion 12

Exhibit 1

(Exhibit 2)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. Exhibit 3 - Parts 1-9 regarding declaration 14

Exhibit 3-1

Exhibit 3-2

Exhibit 3-3

Exhibit 3-4

Exhibit 3-5

Exhibit 3-6

Exhibit 3-7

Exhibit 3-8

(Exhibit 3-9)

MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3)

MEMORANDUM by Nike, Inc. in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 16

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 17

Exhibit 1

(Exhibit 2)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal [3], ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order [11], and motion for electronic service of process [16] are granted in part. Plaintiff's submissions (e.g., Dkt. 14 at 14) 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] and [15]. 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 the equitable accounting that, at this point, Plaintiff states that it may pursue. These facts justify, among other relief, the imposition of a prejudgment asset restraint against Defendants in an amount not to exceed $50,000 per separate account. 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 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 trademarks 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 and infringing 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 several judges have previously noted, there may be reason to question both the propriety of joining 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.

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 6/5/2024.

Registry Deposit Information Form by Nike, Inc.

SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000.00 posted by Nike, Inc. (Document not scanned)

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

MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order

MEMORANDUM by Nike, Inc. in support of extension of time[23]

DECLARATION of Marcella D. Slay regarding memorandum in support of motion[24]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's Motion to extend the temporary restraining order 23 is granted. Enter separate order. Mailed notice.

EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 6/17/2024. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for preliminary injunction as to Certain Defendants

Exhibit A

MEMORANDUM by Nike, Inc. in support of motion for preliminary injunction[28]

DECLARATION of Marcella D. Slay regarding memorandum in support of motion[29]

Exhibit 1

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Nike, Inc. as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 6/28/2024, answer due 7/19/2024.

Declaration of Berel Y. Lakovitsky

Exhibit A

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 forthwith serve all remaining 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 7/8/2024." 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 [19] [20] [27] entering and extending the temporary restraining order ("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.

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. regarding order on motion for preliminary injunction, text entry, [32]

Exhibit A

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction [28] is granted. Enter separate preliminary injunction order. 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 or infringing goods. Plaintiff has also certified and established [31] [33] 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 [32] 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 directed to unseal any and all previously-sealed documents. Mailed notice.

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 7/9/2024. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for preliminary injunction as to Certain Defendants

Exhibit A

MEMORANDUM by Nike, Inc. in support of motion for preliminary injunction[36]

NEW PARTIES: Chongqing Yuanda Technology Co., Ltd., Dongguan Leibeika Trading Co., Ltd., Foshan Zhubeile Clothing Co., Ltd., Fujian Xinglai Industrial Co., Ltd., Fuzhou Harvest Land Industry Co., Ltd., Guangzhou Haizhu District Huangmaojin Shoes Business Department, Guangzhou Haomai Trading Co., Ltd., Guangzhou Jidiya Clothing Firm, Guangzhou Shoewell International Trade Co., Ltd., Guangzhou Tabian Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Huanyan Baby Products Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Yizhi Technology Co., Ltd., Jieyang Airport Area Paotai Town Departure Footwear Processing Plant, Jieyang Rongcheng Freedom Home Commodity Store, Jinjiang City Chendai Town Ding Weihan Shoes and Clothing Firm (Individual Business), Jinjiang Huayingxing Packaging Products Trading Co., Ltd., Kaifeng Nian Trade Co., Ltd., Pingnan Chensheng Garment Accessories Co., Ltd., Qingdao Xinliyu International Trade Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Andu Shoes Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Bitexiong Trading Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Doing Trading Corp., Ltd., Quanzhou Easy Trade Technology Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Fansheng Trading Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Fuge Trading Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Jiansheng Printing Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Minyang Printing Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Suhuo Trading Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Yaoyang Printing Co., Ltd., Quanzhou Zihu Trading Co., Ltd., Shanghai Xinheng Printing Co., Ltd., Shanghai Xinmu Electromechanical Technology Co., Ltd, Shantou Chenghai District Liyimei Clothing Firm (individual Business), Shenyang Hengshengwei Trading Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Lingyi Shijie Technology Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Tengyu Technology Trading Co., Ltd., Sichuan Aedra Technology Co., Ltd., Suzhou Yunyuhua Information Technology Co., Ltd., Taizhou Chaohu Shoes Co., Ltd., Taizhou Global Trading Co., Ltd., Taizhou Luqiao Fengqingyun E-Commerce Firm, Yancheng Slipper New Materials Technology Co., Ltd., Yiwu City Anni E-Commerce Firm, Yiwu Qing Yu E-Commerce Firm, Yiwu Xiangguan Children Products Co., Ltd., Yiwu Yihe Decoration Accessory Firm, bulicishangmao, catcat, CHENsuY, F0h7on0gP7BT1g5a5nY, foshanshinanhaiquxinhenglingshangmaoyouxiangongsi, haoyunshopovo, Jingbu department store, LiJingxiong, Litovate, LuckiEriBov, meryoo, Mian9-shop, MR.B 5-7Days Fast Delivery, MR.Q 5-7Days Fast Delivery, oushenyangshangmaosfd, penghaishangmao, SamsonJR, susongxianwenyanbaihuoshanghang, XiaKaiYuan21, Xufeng-shop, xYolk, YIQIZQ, ZhuShuLiang426, 36boutique, fengchenglin564, ffdfd-17, wjj188515, xiangyangsuxia_0, xuyan5, yanshanyulongshan-0, Baby Albion shoes, HongyuTrading, bellacollins371zly, accessoriesstreetwear.com, jacksneaker.com, jaskicks.ru, pmkclub.com, trendysneakers.shop, beiyunfeng4154, BiggerDigger, CERELACK, Dinowalk, FUQIman, gerhg, Gggyfbb, hanyu1682, Hhjfjajdkd, Hummells, JamieDonahuewPvCvV, jiaseng2449, Kenneth J Johnson, koruenfjie, Lauren R Miller, liaoshuting 2019, lijiajia6074, liqiyu0585, liyueyue5512, lklsd, Lloymshop, Loyal Neon Alloys, lvjincheng4147, Neiwy hats, penghaohao5461, rongguanying7132, Rosedar, shegnbao9s8j3g, shixue4528, sniaoliamki, sunjun2134, The bandy store, wangyuantingshop, Wiz Khalifa, xie zi bang bang mang, xingjianning8743, xuchanghong2134, xuyawei1880, yaoxiaoyi8643, YiMaBibiana and zhuyilin3046 added to case caption.

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[37]

Exhibit 1

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Nike, Inc. as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 7/9/2024, answer due 7/30/2024.

Declaration of Berel Y. Lakovitsky

Exhibit A

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion 36 for entry of a preliminary injunction as to certain Defendants. In connection with that motion, which is entered and continued, Plaintiff must forthwith 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 7/18/2024." 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 entering and extending the temporary restraining order ("TRO"), as well as in Plaintiff's earlier motion 25 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.

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. regarding text entry, 40

(Exhibit A)

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Nike, Inc. as to a Certain Defendant

MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for entry of default as to all Defendants, MOTION by Plaintiff Nike, Inc. for default judgment as to all Defendants

(Exhibit A)

MEMORANDUM by Nike, Inc. in support of motion for entry of default, motion for default judgment 43

(Exhibit 1)

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 44

(Exhibit 1)

ORDER: Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 8/5/2024. Mailed notice.

FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER: Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 8/5/2024. Mailed notice.

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 47 in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendants

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 47 in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendants

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 47 in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendant

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 47 in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendants

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 47 in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendant

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 47 in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendant

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 47 in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendant

FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order[47] in the amount of $100,000 as to certain defendant