SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 164 Nice Business

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 182 Yuankun

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 1 XiangBaoPiJuHang

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 176 HSMHQJshop and 168 Dahaostore

SATISFACTION of Judgment CORRECTED Notice of Dismissal [42] as to 44 Vivianbuy

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 44 Vivianbuy

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to [Certain] defendants

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs as to Defendant no. 140 Lanbailan-US

AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT granting motion 38 signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 12/1/2023. Mailed notice

Motion by Jonas Sebastian Jodicke Plaintiff's Motion to Correct the Final Judgment Under Rule 60(A), or, in the Alternative, to Amend The Final Judgment Under Rule 59(E)Against The Defendants Identified in First Amended Schedule A

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to [Certain] defendants

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs as to Defendant no. 115 HLZHLZ

FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 11/13/2023. Mailed notice

ORDER: No Defendant has responded to Plaintiff's motion (Dkt. [24]) for entry of default and a default final judgment. All remaining Defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. (Defendant HLZHLZ was granted until November 8, 2023 to answer, but it missed that extended deadline and has not sought additional time; Defendant HIORAM, which also appeared through counsel, has been dismissed by Plaintiff.) Accordingly, default is entered under Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In addition, the Court grants the motion for a default final judgment. Defendants directly target their business activities toward consumers in the United States, including Illinois, and this Court therefore has personal jurisdiction over Defendants. Am. Bridal & Prom Indus. Ass'n v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, 192 F. Supp. 3d 924, 934 (N.D. Ill. 2016). Plaintiff has presented screenshot evidence that each Defendant Internetv Store is reaching out to do business with Illinois residents by operating one or more commercial, interactive Internet Stores through which Illinois residents can and do purchase infringing products. See, e.g., Dkt. 12, 13. In addition, 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 is warranted. The infringement of Plaintiff's copyrights irreparably harms Plaintiff and confuses the public. Defendants' infringement was willful and statutory damages are thus awarded. After considering the nature of the copyrighted material, the price point, the absence of any concrete evidence of lost profits or high-volume infringement by Defendants (Plaintiff has not sought an accounting of profits), the value of Plaintiff's copyrights, and the need to deter infringement that is easily committed and difficult to stop, the Court finds that $50,000 per distinct Defendant is an appropriate award of statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(2) for Defendants' willful infringement of Plaintiff's copyrights. Enter separate Final Judgment Order. Plaintiff's pending motion for entry of a preliminary injunction (Dkt. [18]) is dismissed as moot. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 11/13/2023. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Defendant's Second Motion for extension of time to answer [31] is granted. Defendant HLZHLZ must answer or otherwise plead to Plaintiff's complaint on or before 11/8/2023. Mailed notice

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs as to [Certain] defendants

MOTION by Defendant HLZHLZ for extension of time UNOPPOSED

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Defendants' Motions for extension of time to answer [28] [29] are granted. Defendant HLZHLZ must answer or otherwise plead to Plaintiff's complaint on or before 10/18/2023. Defendant HIORAM must answer or otherwise plead to Plaintiff's complaint on or before 11/1/2023. Mailed notice

MOTION by Defendant HIORAM for extension of time to file answer regarding complaint[1], CONSENTED

MOTION by Defendant HLZHLZ for extension of time

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HLZHLZ by Adam Edward Urbanczyk

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant HIORAM by Yong Chen

MEMORANDUM by Jonas Sebastian Jodicke in support of motion for default judgment 24

附件：

1:Exhibit 1
2:Exhibit 2
3:(Declaration of Keith A. Vogt)

MOTION by Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke for default judgment as to Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default and Default Judgment Against the Defendants Identified in First Amended Schedule A

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs as to [Certain] defendants

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke regarding text entry, 21

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion 18 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 9/22/2023." Plaintiff must promptly file proof of service of the Court's statement. Mailed notice

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Jonas Sebastian Jodicke as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 9/14/2023, answer due 10/5/2023.

附件：

1:(Declaration of Service)

MEMORANDUM by Jonas Sebastian Jodicke in support of motion for preliminary injunction 18

附件：

1:Declaration of Service
2:(Exhibit 1, of Keith A. Vogt's declaration)

MOTION by Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke for preliminary injunction

SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000 posted by Jonas Sebastian Jodicke (Document not scanned.)

SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 9/5/2023. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal 9, motion for leave to file excess pages 10, and ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order and other relief 11 are granted in part. Plaintiff's submissions (e.g., Dkt. 12 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, 11, and 13. 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 infringing on Plaintiff's copyrights 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 harm caused by infringing 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. 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

MAILED Copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC.

附件：

1:((List of Copyrights))

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke Sealed Exhibit 2, Declaration of Jonas Sebastian Jodicke regarding memorandum in support of motion, 12

附件：

1:Exhibit 2-1
2:Exhibit 2-2
3:(Exhibit 2-3)

MEMORANDUM in support of 11 Exparte motion

附件：

1:Declaration of Keith A. Vogt
2:Exhibit 1-4, of Keith A. Vogt's declaration
3:Declaration of Jonas Sebastian Jodicke
4:(Exhibit 1, of Jonas Sebastian Jodicke's declaration)

MOTION by Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke for leave to file excess pages

MOTION by Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke for leave to file under seal

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.

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John F. Kness. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert. Case assignment: Random assignment.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke by Cameron Eugene Mcintyre

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke by Yi Bu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke by Yanling Jiang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke by Keith A. Vogt

CIVIL Cover Sheet

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Jonas Sebastian Jodicke Schedule A to Complaint 1

COMPLAINT filed by Jonas Sebastian Jodicke; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-20802145.

附件：

1:Exhibit 1
2:Exhibit 2
3:Exhibit 3
4:(Exhibit 4)