2025-cv-09212

COMPLAINT filed by Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. ; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number BILNDC-23836745.

(Exhibit 1)

Exhibit 1

(Exhibit 1)

Declaration of Madeline B. Halgren

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. Schedule A regarding complaint 1

(Exhibit 2)

(Exhibit A)

MOTION by Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. for leave to file under seal

CIVIL Cover Sheet

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc.

Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. by Justin R. Gaudio

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. by Amy Crout Ziegler

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. by Jennifer Van Nacht

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. by Madeline Halgren

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Laura K. McNally. 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.)

AMENDED complaint by Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. against hoanngu_9224, Individuals and Entities Operating hoanngu_9224 and terminating The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. Amended Schedule A regarding amended complaint, 11

MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA

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

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal, 3, is denied. Plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal so that plaintiff may obtain a temporary restraining order freezing the defendants' assets before revealing the defendants' identities. Id. at 1-2. "The Supreme Court has made clear that courts lack the power to issue an asset freeze at the beginning of a case, unless that party is seeking equitable monetary relief." Zorro Productions, Inc. v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto, No. 23-cv-5761, 2023 WL 8807254, at *4 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 20, 2023) (citing Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo S.A. v. All. Bond Fund, Inc., 527 U.S. 308 (1999)); see also Shenzhen Yihong Lighting Co., Ltd. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 23-cv-1560, at Dkt. 15 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 22, 2023). Indeed, "[a]s a general matter [ ] prejudgment asset restraints are not proper simply to establish a fund from which a later award of money damages can be satisfied." Zorro, 2023 WL 8807254, at *4 (second alteration in original) (quoting Banister v. Firestone, No. 17-cv-8940, 2018 WL 4224444, at *9 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 5, 2018)). In Schedule A cases, plaintiffs often initially demand equitable relief in the form of an accounting of profits, but after obtaining a temporary asset freeze, plaintiffs uniformly shift their focus to demanding statutory damages. Id. at *3-4. In substance, then, if not in form, Schedule A plaintiffs seek prejudgment asset restraints to establish a fund from which money damages may be awarded. So, despite the demand in plaintiff's complaint that it be awarded defendants' profits, the court is not persuaded that plaintiff will actually seek or obtain such equitable relief-as opposed to statutory damages-in this case. See id. Thus, even if plaintiff's initial demand for an accounting of profits could provide this court with the power to issue a prejudgment asset freeze, see Grupo Mexicano, 527 U.S. at 333; Banister, 2018 WL 4224444, at *9, the court is not persuaded that such a freeze is warranted. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal, 3, is therefore denied. Plaintiff's sealed exhibit, 2, is stricken. If plaintiff wishes to proceed with this case, plaintiff must file an unsealed Schedule A publicly on the docket by 8/13/2025.

MOTION by Plaintiff Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. for discovery Expedited

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

MEMORANDUM by Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 17

DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 18

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for expedited discovery, 16, and motion for electronic service of process, 17 are granted. Enter order.

EXPEDITED DISCOVERY AND ELECTRONIC SERVICE ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 8/13/2025:

SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendant hoanngu_9224

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. as to Individuals and Entities Operating hoanngu_9224 on 8/22/2025, answer due 9/12/2025; hoanngu_9224 on 8/22/2025, answer due 9/12/2025.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Birkenstock US BidCo, Inc. as to hoanngu_9224 and the Individuals and Entities Operating hoanngu_9224

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, [25]. This dismissal took effect without court intervention. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i); Waetzig v. Haliburton Energy Servs., 145 S. Ct. 690, 694 (2025). Civil case terminated.