2025-cv-04970

COMPLAINT filed by Hallmark Licensing, LLC ; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23446184.

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 1

Exhibit A

Declaration of Jennifer V. Nacht

Declaration of Madeline B. Halgren

Exhibit A

Exhibit

Exhibit A

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 1

Exhibit A

Exhibit A

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 1

Exhibit A

Declaration

Exhibit 1

Exhibit

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC Schedule A regarding complaint[1]

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 2

Exhibit A

Exhibit

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 2

Exhibit

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for leave to file under Seal

Declaration

Exhibit 3

Exhibit 3

CIVIL Cover Sheet

Declaration

Exhibit 4

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Hallmark Licensing, LLC

Declaration

Exhibit 5

Notice of Claims involving Trademarks by Hallmark Licensing, LLC

Exhibit 6

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC by Justin R. Gaudio

Exhibit 7

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC by Amy Crout Ziegler

Exhibit 8

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC by Jennifer Van Nacht

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC by Madeline Halgren

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Heather K. McShain. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (Text entry; no document attached.)

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. (Text entry; no document attached.)

NEW PARTIES: Shop1102721291 Store, Shop1104383202 Store, Shop1104486046 Store, Shophei20230909 Store, SjeserotShop, gremels15, AAWYPKDVJH, AcrazyLady, AKTBGFD, Babys bargain shop, bincools, Carlotaa, CUILINGO SHOP, DAMARISZLW, DEWRT, Family Club Z, FDDshop, FENVOX, ForLOBO, funny sea, gofeeling, Home Furnishing cn, HOMELEX, HUMBLE SWAG, inesss tumble, Infinity Kingdom, Insight Hoodie B, JRjcwlRJ, junqianshangmao, KIKIESS, LIUHUA, LiuyongchengA, LOVE ZRT, Luckiness AO, MENS FASHION HU, NakYhoVO, NeonThreads, OskyBSD, Pasitin, quanjianhaotanJ, sixth sense studio, Standout Tshirts, Star cooffee cup, TONGHENGFEI, WangjieA, yanguifanbaihuodian, young lin, ZFVZMA, ZZMBR, BAOXIN Co.Ltd, BecMoc, hanyade, lizhengwei0101, Nianyaokeji, quanzhoushihongchengyipindianzishangwuyouxiangongsi, shanxihuajuanquwangluokeji, shewenjie, The Berea Company, Wes doll shop, Yang Yongjun, Yeeman, Yufanshop, YUNMING Co.Ltd and ZONGZHI Co.Ltd added to case caption. (Text entry; no document attached.)

NOTICE of appeal by HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED regarding orders [91]; Filing fee $ 605. Receipt number: AILNDC-23789403 (Text entry; no document attached.)

MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA

MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The Court grants the motion to seal 3, but upon review of the complaint, the Court sua sponte raises the propriety of joining more than 60 defendants in a single action. By May 20, 2025, plaintiff must file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder. In the alternative, plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint by May 19, 2025 with a smaller subset of defendants along with a memorandum explaining why that smaller subset of defendants is properly joined. No motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order should be filed in this matter without counsel first consulting the opinion issued in Wham-O Holding v. The Partnerships, 24 CV 12523, Dkt. 39 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 20, 2025) (Alexakis, J.). Mailed notice.

Supplemental Memorandum in Response to Minute Order [13] by Hallmark Licensing, LLC

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding other[14]

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for temporary restraining order including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery

MEMORANDUM by Hallmark Licensing, LLC in support of motion for temporary restraining order[16]

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

DECLARATION of Stacey Howe regarding memorandum in support of motion[17]

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC Exhibit 3 - Parts 1-2 regarding declaration[19]

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

MEMORANDUM by Hallmark Licensing, LLC in support of motion for miscellaneous relief[21]

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[22]

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC Schedule A Template

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for electronic service [21] is granted, although if a defendant later appears and challenges the propriety of service, the Court will take a fresh look at the issue. The motion for a TRO [16] is denied without prejudice to renewal. "Disgorgement is an equitable remedy to be imposed by the Court" and "is an appropriate remedy where the defendant actually holds property or proceeds that belong to the plaintiff which can be returned to the plaintiff." See Cont'l Vineyard LLC v. Dzierzawski, No. 12 C 3375, 2018 WL 11195945, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 5, 2018). It is a form of relief that requires specificity from the plaintiff, who must identify the particular property or proceeds he seeks to recover. See also Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo S.A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc., 527 U.S. 308, 331 (1999) (explaining that courts lack the power to issue an asset freeze at the beginning of a case, unless that party is seeking equitable relief). Even in the typical disgorgement scenario, courts are not obligated to impose a prejudgment asset restraint. The decision to do so is discretionary, and the Court declines to exercise its discretion in the broad manner requested. In particular, the Court is not prepared to impose a prejudgment asset restraint that potentially encompasses legitimate assets. To do so would be to relieve Plaintiff of its burden to identify the property or proceeds it seeks to enjoin with a sufficient degree of specificity. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for reconsideration regarding order on motion for temporary restraining order, order on motion for miscellaneous relief, text entry, [25]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for reconsideration 26 is granted. The prior request for a temporary restraining order is partly granted and modified such that the asset restraint may apply only to money or assets traceable to sales of the accused products. 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. The Temporary Restraining Order being entered along with this minute order shall 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. 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 an accounting. In addition, the evidence submitted by Plaintiff shows a likelihood of success on the merits, 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 goods, and there is no countervailing harm to defendants from an order directing them to stop infringement. Enter Sealed Temporary Restraining Order. Mailed notice.

SUMMONS Submitted (Court Participant) for defendant(s) The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC

Registry Deposit Information Form by Hallmark Licensing, LLC

SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendant The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000.00 posted by Hallmark Licensing, LLC. (Document not imaged)

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order

MEMORANDUM by Hallmark Licensing, LLC in support of extension of time 33

DECLARATION of Jennifer V. Nacht regarding memorandum in support of motion 34

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion to extend the TRO [33] is granted. The TRO is extended to June 18, 2025. Mailed notice.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED by Tao Liu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED by Wei Wang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED by Jie Li

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED by Tianyun Ji JI, TIANYUN

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for preliminary injunction

MEMORANDUM by Hallmark Licensing, LLC in support of motion for preliminary injunction[41]

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Hallmark Licensing, LLC as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 6/5/2025, answer due 6/26/2025.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for entry of a preliminary injunction. In connection with that motion, Plaintiff must 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 by June 11, 2025." If no objections are filed by that date, the Court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining Defendants within one business day of its entry on the docket and must promptly file proof of that service. For the reasons stated in the Court's orders entering the TRO, the TRO is extended until 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 Hallmark Licensing, LLC regarding set motion and R&R deadlines/hearings, [44]

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED by Ruoting Men

MOTION by Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED to set a briefing schedule PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION BRIEFING SCHEDULE 30 days for opposition and 14 days for reply

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion to set a briefing schedule [47] is partly granted. Defendant No. 23 Hong Kong Yueqi Techlimited d/b/a Homelex's response to the motion for a preliminary injunction is due by June 26, 2025 and any reply is due by July 3, 2025. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The following order does not apply to Defendant No. 23 Hong Kong Yueqi Techlimited d/b/a Homelex. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction [41] is granted, which the Court now considers unopposed except as to Homelex, because no defendant filed a notice of objection by the established deadline. For the reasons set forth in plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, as well as the reasons provided by plaintiff in connection with the Court's earlier entry of the TRO, the Court is persuaded that plaintiff has satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction, including 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 goods. Plaintiff has also certified and established [45] that it provided electronic notice to defendants of the pendency of this case and provided a link to a website containing relevant case documents. Enter preliminary injunction order. The Clerk shall unseal any documents that are sealed. The Law Firm of Greer, Burns & Crain Ltd., is ordered to add ALL defendant names listed in the Schedule A to the docket within five business days, instructions can be found on the Court's website at https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/_forms/_cmecf/pdfs/v60/Add_Terminate_Instructions.pdf. Mailed notice.

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Order Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 6/12/2025. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: By July 1, 2025, Plaintiff shall file a status report regarding next steps in this case. If Plaintiff intends to file a motion for default judgment, it should be filed by that date, and if Plaintiff moves for default judgment as to all remaining Defendants (aside from Homelex), no status report need be filed. Mailed notice.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED by Dandan Pan

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Hallmark Licensing, LLC as to certain defendants

RESPONSE by Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED to memorandum in support of motion[42]

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants BAOXIN Co.Ltd, YUNMING Co.Ltd by He Cheng

MOTION by Defendants BAOXIN Co.Ltd, YUNMING Co.Ltd for extension of time to file answer regarding complaint[1]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendants BAOXIN Co.Ltd, YUNMING Co.Ltd's unopposed motion for an extension of time [56] is granted. These Defendants' responsive pleadings are now due by July 10, 2025. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC to approve consent judgment as to a Certain Defendant

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for entry of default as to Certain Defendants

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding motion for entry of default[59]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The following order does not apply to Defendants BAOXIN Co.Ltd, YUNMING Co. Ltd only. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment against certain Defendants 59. All remaining defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. Accordingly, default is entered under Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Any objections to the motion for entry of default judgment must be filed on or before July 7, 2025. If no objections are filed by that date, the court will consider the motion unopposed. The Court will also rule on the papers unless a hearing is requested by July 3, 2025. A hearing may be requested by filing a Request for Hearing as a separate entry on the docket. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining Defendants within one business day of its entry on the docket and must promptly file proof of that service. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Motion to approve consent judgment 58 is granted. Enter consent judgment. Mailed notice.

ENTERED CONSENT JUDGMENT AS TO certain defendants Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 6/30/2025. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: As between Plaintiff and Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED, the court entered the preliminary injunction order on the same day that this Defendant filed its response brief. The parties are to confer and inform the court whether they have resolved their dispute. If not, Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED may file a motion to vacate by no later than July 7, 2025. Any response is due by July 14, 2025. No replies unless the court requests a reply. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Order 61 is amended. The following order does not apply to Defendants BAOXIN Co.Ltd, YUNMING Co. Ltd only. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for entry of default as to certain Defendants 59. All remaining defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. Accordingly, default is entered under Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Plaintiff's Motion for default judgment as to certain defendants is due by July 11, 2025. This order does not apply to Defendants BAOXIN Co.Ltd, YUNMING Co. Ltd., whose responsive pleadings remain due by July 10, 2025. As between Plaintiff and Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED, docket entry 64 is stricken. The briefing schedule set by docket entry 48 stands. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Defendants HOMELEX, HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED to vacate order on motion for entry of default, text entry, [61] Amended Order [65]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion to vacate [67] is granted. Plaintiff should not have included Defendant Hongkong Yueqi Tech Ltd. d/b/a Homelex in the default judgment order submitted to the court. Default judgment as to this Defendant only is vacated. Plaintiff's reply brief as to the preliminary injunction for Defendant Homelex remains due by today, July 3, 2025. Mailed notice.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Hallmark Licensing, LLC as to certain defendants

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for Leave to Conduct Discovery and Extend Plaintiff's Reply Deadline

DECLARATION of Jennifer V. Nacht regarding motion for miscellaneous relief[70]

RESPONSE by HOMELEX, HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITEDin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for Leave to Conduct Discovery and Extend Plaintiff's Reply Deadline [70]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for leave to extend [70] is largely denied. Defendant Hongkong Yueqi Tech Ltd. d/b/a Homelex filed its response in opposition to a preliminary injunction on June 26, 2025, and that filing contained the declarations and affidavits that Plaintiff now says it needs time to investigate. Rather than filing a motion for extension of time promptly upon receiving Defendant's response, Plaintiff sought default judgment against this Defendant and others the very next day, with no indication that Plaintiff wished to explore any discovery matters raised by Defendant's submission. Then, after the court entered default judgment against Defendant Hongkong Yueqi Tech Ltd. d/b/a Homelex in error, and on the same day that Plaintiff's reply brief was due, Plaintiff asked for as many as 45 days to conduct discovery plus another 30 days to file its reply. Plaintiff's belated request for 75 days to resolve the narrow question of whether to dissolve the TRO or alternatively to issue a preliminary injunction as to Defendant Homelex is not proportional to the needs of the case and Plaintiff's motion simply does not justify the period of time requested. Any reply to the motion for a preliminary injunction as to Defendant Homelex is now due by July 11, 2025. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC to approve consent judgment as to Defendant YUNMING Co. Ltd (Def. No. 63)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for approval of the consent judgment [74] is granted. Separate order to issue. Mailed notice.

ENTERED CONSENT JUDGMENT as to certain defendant(s) Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 7/8/2025. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: A revised proposed order as to the Defendants impacted by the motion for default judgment should be sent to the Court's PO Box by July 10, 2025. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The order at docket entry [77] is amended only as to the due date: A revised proposed order as to the Defendants impacted by the motion for default judgment should be sent to the Court's PO Box by July 11, 2025. Mailed notice.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Hallmark Licensing, LLC as to certain defendant

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for default judgment as to Certain Defendants

MEMORANDUM by Hallmark Licensing, LLC in support of motion for default judgment[80]

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[81]

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation (Agreed)

REPLY by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of a Preliminary Injunction [41]

DECLARATION of Jennifer V. Nacht regarding reply[84]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The following order does not apply to Defendant Homelex. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for default judgment against all remaining Defendants. All remaining defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. Accordingly, default is entered under Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Any objections to the motion for entry of default judgment must be filed on or before July 21, 2025. If no objections are filed by that date, the court will consider the motion unopposed. The Court will also rule on the papers unless a hearing is requested by July 17, 2025. A hearing may be requested by filing a Request for Hearing as a separate entry on the docket. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining Defendants within one business day of its entry on the docket and must promptly file proof of that service. Mailed notice.

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC regarding text entry, [86]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The following order does not apply to Defendant Homelex. No remaining Defendant has responded to Plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment. Accordingly, the motion [80] is granted. Based on the evidence previously submitted by Plaintiff and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, Plaintiff has established that a permanent injunction should be entered. The Clerk is directed to return the surety bond posted. Enter Final Judgment Order as to certain defendants. Mailed notice.

ENTERED DEFAULT JUDGMENT as to certain defendants Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 7/22/2025. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendant Hongkong Yueqi Tech Ltd. d/b/a Homelex's opposition to a preliminary injunction is denied. The unopposed motion for excess pages [83] is granted. See the attached order for further details. Plaintiff shall submit a proposed preliminary injunction order to the court's PO Box by July 24, 2025. Assuming Defendant Homelex intends to respond to the complaint, its answer is due by August 4, 2025 and the parties are to confer and propose a fact discovery schedule by August 6, 2025. Mailed notice.

ORDER written by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 7/23/2025. Mailed notice.

NOTICE of appeal by HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED regarding orders [91] Filing fee $ 605, receipt number AILNDC-23789403. Receipt number: n

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: In light of the notice of the appeal, the matter is stayed. No answer or discovery schedule need be filed by the dates previously provided. Mailed notice.

NOTICE of Appeal Due letter sent to counsel of record regarding notice of appeal [92]

TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on notice of appeal [92]. Notified counsel

ACKNOWLEDGMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal [92]; USCA Case No. 25-2255.

MOTION by Defendants HOMELEX, HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED to stay regarding order[91] Preliminary Injunction pending appeal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(d) and Fed. R. App. P. 8(a).

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The matter is set for a telephonic status hearing on July 30, 2025 at 10:15 am. Plaintiff should be prepared to offer its position on the motion to stay. In addition, the court wishes to better understand Defendant's statement that it is "amenable to a brief, tightly cabined evidentiary hearing with time limited cross examination of Dr. Brown, Prof. Rosenblum, and Ms. Sophia Chen." [Dkt. [97] at 6]. To this end, the court's order disregarded expert materials for the reasons explained, but Defendant explains why it believes fair notice was provided. Had those materials been considered, Dr. Brown's description of "a 1995 Bible Land children's board game piece depicting a cute, chubby cheeked Jesus in a white robe with a blue sash" decades before Hallmark's 2017 doll would have been among the relevant considerations. (This is but one example). The parties should confer, if possible, and be prepared to discuss appropriate next steps at the status hearing, bearing in mind the constraints raised by the pending appeal. Attorneys/Parties should appear for the hearing by calling the Toll-Free Number: 855-244-8681, Access Code: 2302 225 8245. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing (use toll free number). Please, please be sure to keep your phone on mute when you are not speaking. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. Mailed notice.

RESPONSE by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC to set/reset hearings, [98]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Telephone conference held. Plaintiff's Response to Defendant Hongkong Yueqi Tech Ltd.'s d/b/a Homelex motion to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal [97] is due by August 13, 2025; reply due by August 20, 2025. Mailed notice.

RESPONSE by Hallmark Licensing, LLC in Opposition to MOTION by Defendants HOMELEX, HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED to stay regarding order[91] Preliminary Injunction pending appeal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(d) and Fed. R. App. P. 8(a). [97]

DECLARATION of Jennifer V. Nacht regarding response in opposition to motion, [101]

REPLY by HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED to response in opposition to motion, [101] Reply in Support of Motion to Stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal

Notice of Appellate Decision by Hallmark Licensing, LLC

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 7/30/25 before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins. Order Number: 52602. Court Reporter Contact Information: Joseph Rickhoff, 312-435-5562, joseph_rickhoff@ilnd.uscourts.gov. IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings. Redaction Request due 9/15/2025. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 9/25/2025. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 11/24/2025.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for stay of the preliminary injunction pending appeal [97] is granted. The court stays enforcement of the preliminary injunction order while the appeal is pending. See attached order for further details. As described in the attached order, the court adopts Hallmark's unopposed request that the court lift the overall stay in the case entered on July 24, 2025. [see docket entry [93].] The stay of the case [93] is lifted. Defendant Homelex's answer is due by September 11, 2025. Fact discovery should begin between the parties and by September 18, 2025, the parties are to jointly propose a discovery schedule so that the court can impose firm discovery deadlines. Mailed notice.

ORDER written by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 8/28/2025. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The matter is set for a telephonic status hearing on September 11, 2025 at 9:00 am. After further review of the briefs on the motion to stay enforcement of the preliminary injunction, the court is concerned that it may have erroneously excluded the declarations or testimony of Dr. Brown, Prof. Rosenblum, and Ms. Sophia Chen offered by Defendant in opposition to a preliminary injunction. The court's July 2025 order explained that it was disregarding this evidence because Plaintiff complained that the expert disclosure was untimely. As Defendant points out in its brief, see docket entry 97, a harmlessness analysis under David v. Caterpillar, Inc., 324 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2003) was a more appropriate approach, which the court did not conduct. Because the court's preliminary injunction decision is currently under appellate review by the Seventh Circuit, (see Notice of Appeal, Dkt. 92), the court lacks jurisdiction to sua sponte reconsider its previous decision. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982) ("The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance - it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal."). However, because of the court's concern about having made a potentially erroneous decision, the court notifies the parties that it intends to notify the Seventh Circuit that (1) the court intends to sua sponte reconsider its decision granting a preliminary injunction, should the Seventh Circuit remand for this purpose, and (2) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62.1, upon reconsideration, the court would likely reverse its decision to exclude the expert evidence on timeliness grounds and hold a preliminary injunction hearing to determine whether a preliminary injunction should be granted in light of this evidence. See Mendia v. Garcia, 874 F.3d 1118, 1121 (9th Cir. 2017) ("Therefore, in the interest of effectively using our time and resources, as well as a means of legitimate case management, we join our sister circuits in holding that a FRCP 62.1 motion is not a prerequisite for a limited remand under FRAP 12.1(b) where the district court has already indicated it would grant a motion for the requested relief.") (collecting cases); Gustavia Home, LLC v. Hoyer, 2025 WL 2233400, at *2 n.3 (2nd Cir. Aug. 6, 2025) (remanding under FRAP 12.1 and FRCP 62.1 when a district court issued an indicative ruling sua sponte, as opposed to in response to a motion, after notifying the parties of its intent to do so); Fort Knox Music Inc. v. Baptiste, 257 F.3d 108, 111 (2d Cir. 2001) (A "district court 'has power to decide sua sponte whether its judgment should be vacated, provided all parties have notice.'") (quoting Int'l Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 556 F.2d 665, 668 n.2 (2d Cir. 1977)) (cleaned up)). The parties should be prepared at the status hearing to explain whether they wish to file a motion for relief under FRCP 62.1. or to place any objection to the court issuing an indicative ruling that it intends to reconsider its preliminary injunction order on the record at the hearing. Attorneys/Parties should appear for the hearing by calling the Toll-Free Number: 855-244-8681, Access Code: 2302 225 8245. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing (use toll free number). Please, please be sure to keep your phone on mute when you are not speaking. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. Mailed notice.

RESPONSE by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC and Motion for Reconsideration and Clarification of Order [107] and Minute Entry [108]

RESPONSE by Defendants HOMELEX, HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED to Response 109 Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration and Clarification of Order 107 and Minute Entry 108

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC by Berel Yonathan Lakovitsky

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Telephone conference held. Discussion held on the pending appeal, which defendants intend to dismiss. The parties are to file a joint status report as to next steps on any motion for reconsideration by September 25, 2025. Mailed notice.

ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand, COUNTERCLAIM filed by HOMELEX against Hallmark Licensing, LLC. by HOMELEX

CERTIFIED copy of order dated 09/17/2025 from the 7th Circuit regarding notice of appeal[92] ; Appellate case no. : 25-2255. Upon consideration of DEFENDANT-APPELLANT HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LTD.'S MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE, filed on September 15, 2025, by counsel for the appellant, IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b).

MANDATE of USCA dated 09/17/2025 regarding notice of appeal[92] ;USCA No.25-2255 ; No record to be returned.

MOTION by Plaintiff Hallmark Licensing, LLC for extension of time to Respond to Defendant's Counterclaims (Agreed)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The agreed motion for an extension of time [116] is granted. Plaintiff's responses to Defendant's counterclaims is now due by October 23, 2025. Mailed notice.

STATUS Report per [112] (Joint) by Hallmark Licensing, LLC

MOTION by Defendant HONGKONG YUEQI TECH LIMITED for reconsideration regarding order[91]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins:Plaintiff's response to the motion for reconsideration is due by October 16, 2025 and any reply is due by October 30, 2025. Document production should conclude by February 25, 2026 and all fact discovery shall be noticed in time for completion by March 25, 2026. A joint status report that proposes a dispositive motion briefing schedule should be filed by March 27, 2026. (The court doesn't know why the parties have suggested that summary judgment practice should not begin until September 2026 but the status report should address this proposed delay.) Mailed notice.

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 9/11/25 before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins. Order Number: 53019. Court Reporter Contact Information: Joseph Rickhoff, 312-435-5562, joseph_rickhoff@ilnd.uscourts.gov. IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings. Redaction Request due 10/22/2025. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 11/3/2025. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 12/30/2025.