TRO101 logo TRO101

2022-cv-04508

Energizer Holdings, Inc. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A

法院：伊利诺伊州北法院
发案日期：2022-08-24
原告：Energizer Holdings, Inc
代理律所：Keith
诉讼类型：商标
# Date Description
[+] 1 2022-08-24 COMPLAINT filed by Energizer Holdings, Inc.; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-19773689.
2 2022-08-24 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. Schedule A to Complaint 1
3 2022-08-24 CIVIL Cover Sheet
4 2022-08-24 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. by Keith A. Vogt
5 2022-08-24 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. by Yi Bu
6 2022-08-24 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. by Adam Grodman
[+] 7 2022-08-24 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. by Yanling Jiang
8 2022-08-24 MOTION by Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. for leave to file [Certain] Documents Under Seal
9 2022-08-24 MOTION by Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. for leave to file excess pages
[+] 11 2022-08-24 MEMORANDUM In Support of [10] Ex Parte Motion
12 2022-08-24 SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. Sealed Exhibit 2, Declaration of Andrea J. Mealey regarding memorandum in support of motion, [11]
13 2022-08-25 MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA.
14 2022-08-31 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Energizer Holdings, Inc.
15 2022-09-26 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Plaintiff's ex parte motion to seal, motion for excess pages, and motion for a temporary restraining order, asset restraint, expedited discovery, and electronic service of process [8][9][10] are granted. The plaintiff's written submissions establish that if defendants were informed of this proceeding before a TRO could issue, assets would likely be redirected, defeating plaintiff's interests in identifying defendants, stopping the infringement, and obtaining an accounting. In addition, the submitted evidence establishes a likelihood of success on the merits, the harm to plaintiff is irreparable and an injunction is in the public interest because infringement interferes with the plaintiff's ability to control its intellectual property. Those rights cannot be fully compensated by money damages. 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 is an effective, perhaps the most effective, way to communicate with defendants. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and implement the asset freeze. If any defendant were to appear and object, the court will take a fresh look at the asset freeze, joinder, and personal jurisdiction. A $100,000 bond is sufficient to secure the injunctive relief. Enter Sealed Temporary Restraining Order. Notices mailed.
[+] 16 2022-09-26 SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Manish S. Shah on 9/26/2022. Notices mailed.
17 2022-10-03 MOTION by Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. for preliminary injunction
[+] 18 2022-10-03 MEMORANDUM by Energizer Holdings, Inc. in support of motion for preliminary injunction[17]
[+] 19 2022-10-03 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Energizer Holdings, Inc. as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 10/3/2022, answer due 10/24/2022.
20 2022-10-04 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Any objections to the motion for a preliminary injunction must be properly filed by 10/7/22. If no objections are filed, the motion will be considered unopposed. Notices mailed.
21 2022-10-05 SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 100,000 posted by Energizer Holdings, Inc. (Document not imaged)
22 2022-10-25 MOTION by Plaintiff Energizer Holdings, Inc. for default judgment as to The Defendants Identified In Schedule A
[+] 23 2022-10-25 MEMORANDUM by Energizer Holdings, Inc. in support of motion for default judgment[22]
24 2022-10-25 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction [17] is granted. No defendant has appeared or objected to the motion. The evidence submitted in support of the TRO also supports the entry of a preliminary injunction. Enter preliminary injunction. The Clerk is directed to unseal any previously sealed documents in this matter. Plaintiff's counsel is directed to add all defendants listed on Schedule A to the court's docket within three business days. Instructions on how to do so may be located on the court's website at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/instructions. Notices mailed.
[+] 25 2022-10-25 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Manish S. Shah on 10/25/2022. Notices mailed.
[+] 26 2022-10-26 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Any objections to the motion for default judgment must be properly filed by 10/26/22. If no objections are filed, the motion will be considered unopposed. Notices mailed.
27 2022-12-02 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: The motion for entry of default judgment against 22 is granted. No defendants have appeared to object to the motion. Based on the evidence submitted in support of the temporary restraining order and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, plaintiff has established that a permanent injunction should be entered. The infringement of plaintiff's intellectual property irreparably harms plaintiff and confuses the public. The infringement was willful and statutory damages are awarded. After considering the nature of the products, the price point, the absence of any concrete evidence of lost profits or high-volume infringement by defendants, the value of the plaintiff's brand, and the need to deter infringement that is easily committed and difficult to stop, the court concludes that $100,000 is an appropriate award of statutory damages. Enter Default Judgment Order. Terminate civil case. Notices mailed.
28 2022-12-02 DEFAULT FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Manish S. Shah on 12/2/2022. Notices mailed.