|
[+]
1
|
2022-05-18 |
COMPLAINT filed by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-19478538. |
|
|
Exhibit 1 |
|
|
Exhibit 2 |
|
|
Exhibit 3 |
|
|
Exhibit 4 |
|
2
|
2022-05-18 |
SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma Schedule A regarding complaint[1] |
|
3
|
2022-05-18 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for leave to file under seal |
|
4
|
2022-05-18 |
CIVIL Cover Sheet |
|
5
|
2022-05-18 |
Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma |
|
6
|
2022-05-18 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma by Justin R. Gaudio |
|
7
|
2022-05-18 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma by Amy Crout Ziegler |
|
8
|
2022-05-18 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma by Jake Michael Christensen |
|
[+]
9
|
2022-05-18 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma by Rachel S Miller |
|
|
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. |
|
10
|
2022-05-19 |
MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA |
|
11
|
2022-05-24 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for temporary restraining order Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Transfer of the Domain Names, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery |
|
12
|
2022-05-24 |
MEMORANDUM by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma in support of motion for temporary restraining order, 11 |
|
[+]
13
|
2022-05-24 |
DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 12 |
|
|
Exhibit 1 |
|
|
Exhibit 2 |
|
|
Exhibit 3 |
|
|
(Exhibit 4) |
|
[+]
14
|
2022-05-24 |
DECLARATION of Hannah Millsap regarding memorandum in support of motion 12 |
|
|
Exhibit 1 |
|
|
(Exhibit 2) |
|
15
|
2022-05-24 |
DECLARATION of Lindsay Conn regarding memorandum in support of motion 12 |
|
[+]
16
|
2022-05-24 |
SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma Exhibit 1 - Parts 1-2 regarding declaration 15 |
|
|
Exhibit 1-1 |
|
|
(Exhibit 1-2) |
|
17
|
2022-05-24 |
SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma Exhibit 2 regarding declaration 15 |
|
18
|
2022-05-24 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3) |
|
19
|
2022-05-24 |
MEMORANDUM by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 18 |
|
[+]
20
|
2022-05-24 |
DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 19 |
|
|
Exhibit 1 |
|
|
Exhibit 2 |
|
|
(Exhibit 3) |
|
21
|
2022-07-05 |
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 and other relief 11, and motion for electronic service of process 14 are granted in part. Plaintiff's submissions (including the Declarations of Hannah Millsap (Dkt. 14) and Justin R. Gaudio (Dkt. 13)) 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, 16, and 17. 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 an equitable accounting. 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 the 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 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 this Court and others have noted, there may be reason to question both the propriety of the joinder of 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. A temporary transfer of domain names is appropriate to prevent infringing conduct. 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. Mailed notice |
|
[+]
22
|
2022-07-05 |
SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 7/5/2022. |
|
|
SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A |
|
23
|
2022-07-12 |
SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000.00 posted by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma (Document not imaged) |
|
24
|
2022-07-14 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order |
|
[+]
25
|
2022-07-14 |
MEMORANDUM by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma in support of extension of time 24 |
|
|
(Declaration of Jake M. Christensen) |
|
26
|
2022-07-21 |
MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's Motion for extension of time of temporary restraining order 24 is granted. Enter separate order. Mailed notice |
|
27
|
2022-07-21 |
EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 7/21/2022. Mailed notice |
|
[+]
28
|
2022-07-28 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for preliminary injunction, MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order |
|
|
Exhibit A |
|
[+]
29
|
2022-07-28 |
MEMORANDUM by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma in support of motion for preliminary injunction, extension of time, [28] |
|
|
Declaration of Jake M. Christensen |
|
|
Exhibit 1 |
|
[+]
30
|
2022-07-29 |
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 7/28/2022, answer due 8/18/2022. |
|
|
Declaration of Rachel S. Miller |
|
|
(Exhibit A) |
|
31
|
2022-08-02 |
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 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 8/8/2022." 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 TRO, as well as in Plaintiff's earlier motion 24 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 |
|
[+]
32
|
2022-08-02 |
CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma regarding order on motion for preliminary injunction, order on motion for extension of time, terminate deadlines and hearings, set motion and R&R deadlines/hearings, 31 |
|
|
(Exhibit 1) |
|
33
|
2022-08-12 |
MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 28 is granted. 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 goods. Plaintiff has also certified and established 32 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 31 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 requested to unseal any previously-sealed documents. Mailed notice |
|
[+]
34
|
2022-08-12 |
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 8/12/2022. Mailed notice |
|
|
NEW PARTIES: Shop1100031108 Store, fengchi4825 Store, Shop1100037126 Store, Shop1100116029 Store, Lu Lu Metal Store, Shop1718195 Store, Q&Q Store, UJIOM Store, Shop911775490 Store, Decorative plaque11 Store, wall sign 11 Store, Ekangkang Store, Dkangkang Store, Sixth Wall Signs Store, WJ wall sign Store, Classic retro 01 Store, Mr hi wall sign Store, Little pig Wall Store, good good 001 Store, AliExpress-Sports Store, Shop912627162 Store, Xiaoyu3 Boutique Apparel Store, shop666888 Store, meiyingwu Store, huahuazanglibaihuo, DecorSign59, Nicole Hopwood, xushuiwangwenjushanghang, Gold Luck Store, Choco's shop, Lcqfvia, Mr. Weimeng's shower curtain, ZHANGSYA, chenchushengchenchusheng, Hefei Chafao Trading Co., Ltd, WANGZK, HENE'JAL, Wan Da, wujunfuzhuangdian, probowl, Tradeleadercn, projerseydealer, fanzz_jersey, throwbackstore, sport_home99, sports_goods88, kjerseys, Jiangqurong, stitchedjersey01, haoyunjersey, xiaowangzi01, cai fashion, YPXPWJ, CrazyWEN, ranjiahao6512, guojiahui1229, lixiuyang, Marjorie D Blount, wangyafan00852, yanruohan668, collegegame.net, ncaafootball.pro, oklahomasoonersfootballjersey.com, oujersey.com, oklahomajerseys.com, oklahomasoonersjerseys.com, oklahomasoonersshop.com, soonersjersey.com, oklahomasoonersjersey.com, oklahomasoonersfootballjerseys.com, collegeplayerstore.com and ncaajerseys.org added to case caption. |
|
[+]
35
|
2022-08-19 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for entry of default as to all Defendants, MOTION by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma for default judgment as to all Defendants |
|
|
(Exhibit A) |
|
[+]
36
|
2022-08-19 |
MEMORANDUM by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma in support of motion for entry of default, motion for default judgment, 35 |
|
|
(Exhibit 1) |
|
[+]
37
|
2022-08-19 |
DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion 36 |
|
|
(Exhibit 1) |
|
38
|
2022-08-23 |
MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion [35] for entry of default and default judgment against all 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 9/1/2022. 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 two business days of its entry on the docket and must file proof of service within three business of service being effected. Mailed notice |
|
[+]
39
|
2022-08-24 |
CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma regarding text entry, 38 |
|
|
(Exhibit 1) |
|
40
|
2022-10-31 |
ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 10/31/2022. The ten-thousand-dollar ($10,000) surety bond posted by Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma is hereby released to to Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma or its counsel, Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the surety bond previously deposited with the Clerk of the Court to Justin R. Gaudio of Greer Burns & Crain Ltd., 300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2500, Chicago, IL 60606 via certified mail. Enter final judgment order. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice |
|
41
|
2022-10-31 |
FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 10/31/2022. Mailed notice |
|
[+]
42
|
2022-11-01 |
MAILED Trademark report with certified copy of orders dated 10/31/2022 40, 41 to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. |
|
|
MAILED Surety Bond in the amount of $10,000.00 posted by Plaintiff to Justin R. Gaudio Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. via certified mail no. 7019 2280 0000 0962 9740. |
|
43
|
2022-12-07 |
RETURN of Service of USPS Certified Mail Return Receipt no. 7019 2280 0000 0962 9740 returned Executed as to Justin R. Gaudio. |
