2026-cv-03898

COMPLAINT (Verified) filed by bullseyebore, Inc.; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-24953414.

Exhibit 1 - Copyright

Exhibit 2 - Trademark

Exhibit 3 - Evidence Report

(Schedule A)

CIVIL Cover Sheet

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

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Daniel P. McLaughlin. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3).

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.

MAILED copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC.

MAILED trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA.

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

MOTION by Plaintiff bullseyebore, Inc. for temporary restraining order

MEMORANDUM by bullseyebore, Inc. in support of motion for temporary restraining order 7

Declaration of John Cerwin

(Declaration of Nicholas S. Lee)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: The Court requires that any motion for a temporary restraining order and/or asset freeze is accompanied by a declaration from an attorney of record that provides the following information. First, to demonstrate the immediate harm necessary to grant the drastic remedy of an ex parte temporary restraining order, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant has sold or offered to sell the allegedly infringing product(s) within the last two months and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Generally, evidence that a defendant has sold or offered to sell the infringing products within the last two months may include: (1) screenshots of the listings collected within the last two months; (2) screenshots older than two months with an attestation that the listings reflected in the screenshots have been checked within the last two months and were active; or (3) evidence of a purchase by a customer in Illinois within the last two months. Second, as relevant to personal jurisdiction, without which any temporary restraining order or asset freeze would be invalid, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant sold at least one allegedly infringing product to a customer in Illinois and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Here, "sold" means that the defendant accepted an order and payment for an allegedly infringing product to be shipped to Illinois. Third, to assure that Court that the rights of defendants who have not yet been served are being appropriately protected, the declaration must identify the case number(s) and assigned judge(s) for any pending case(s) brought by the plaintiff(s) against any of the named defendants, noting whether the intellectual property at issue was the same or different than in this case. If it is the same, the declaration should describe the disposition of the other case. The Court will address any motion for a temporary restraining order only after receipt of the described declaration, which can be filed contemporaneously with the motion. Additionally, to the extent Plaintiff also makes a motion for expedited discovery or for an order permitting electronic service of process, Plaintiff should submit a proposed order for that relief that is separate from the proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint. The proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint should name the relevant defendants directly in the order, without reference to Schedule A. Mailed notice.

SUPPLEMENT to motion for temporary restraining order 7

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's ex parte motion for entry of a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, and expedited discovery 7. That motion is denied in part and granted in part. The motion is denied in that the Court will not enter a temporary restraining order and asset restraint. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants use Plaintiff's copyrighted photos of its laser-aligned drill guide to confuse consumers into buying Defendants' products thinking that they are Plaintiff's, which tarnishes Plaintiff's "goodwill and reputation." However, Plaintiff has not provided sufficient evidence that Plaintiff's brand is recognized by the consumer public such that Plaintiff possesses any goodwill that can be harmed. Therefore, Plaintiff has not established the irreparable harm necessary for a temporary restraining order. See Hong Kong Leyuzhen Tech. Co. Ltd. v. The Individuals, 25 C 05945, Dkt. #21 (June 18, 2025). Plaintiff further alleges that sales have dropped dramatically due "in substantial part to competition from Defendants' infringing products." R. 8-1 ¶ 26. But Plaintiff's sales vacillate and do not reflect the marked decline described. See id. Ex. C. Moreover, the claim here is that the photos are infringing, not the products themselves. Plaintiff has not shown how the copyrighted photos caused loss of sales. Neither has Plaintiff demonstrated that Defendants' profits are "attributable" to infringement of the copyrighted photographs. See Hong Kong, 25 C 05945, Dkt. #21 ("The continued sale of goods is tangential to the unauthorized use of the photos that forms the basis of the copyright claim and thus that use cannot be a basis to demonstrate that an asset restraint is appropriate."). The motion is granted in that Plaintiff has leave to take expedited discovery. Mailed notice.

Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Expedited Discovery Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 4/15/2026. Mailed notice.

Motion for Alternative Service by bullseyebore, Inc.

SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendant Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associates Identified On Schedule A, The

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Plaintiff's motion for alternative service 13 is granted. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff bullseyebore, Inc. for preliminary injunction

MEMORANDUM by bullseyebore, Inc. in support of motion for preliminary injunction 17

(Declaration of John Cerwin (Supplemental))

CERTIFICATE of Service by Nicholas S. Lee on behalf of bullseyebore, Inc.

ORDER: For the reasons stated in the attached order, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction and asset restraint 17. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 5/4/2026. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff bullseyebore, Inc. for default judgment as to Defendants Identiifed on Schedule A

MEMORANDUM by bullseyebore, Inc. in support of motion for default judgment 21

Exhibit A - Proposed Order (redlined)

(Unpublished Opinions)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: The Court sets a hearing on the Plaintiff's motion for default judgment 21 for 5/27/2026 at 09:15 a.m. in Courtroom 1441. Mailed notice.