NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs (FILED on the incorrect docket) (Docket Text Modified by Clerks Office) Modified on 4/19/2022.

MAILED trademark report with certified copy of minute order dated 4/5/2022 to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Manish S. Shah on 4/5/2022. Notices mailed.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: No defendants have appeared or objected to the motion for default judgment. The motion [32] is granted. 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 marks and copyrighted works 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 $50,000 is an appropriate award of statutory damages (total for both theories of liability). Enter Default Judgment Order. Terminate civil case. All pending motions are terminated as moot. Notices mailed.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Any objections to the motion for entry of default judgment must be filed by 3/18/22. If no objections are filed, the motion will be considered unopposed. Notices mailed.

MEMORANDUM by Mercis B.V. in support of motion for default judgment[32]

附件：

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

MOTION by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. for default judgment as to The Defendants Identified In The Second Amended Schedule A

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Mercis B.V. as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A" on 2/15/2022, answer due 3/8/2022.

附件：

1:(Declaration of Service)

MEMORANDUM by Mercis B.V. in support of motion for preliminary injunction 29

附件：

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

MOTION by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. for preliminary injunction

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: The motion for extension of time 27 is granted. Plaintiff having established good cause for the extension, the ex parte TRO is extended to 2/22/22.

MOTION by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. for extension of time of the Temporary Restraining Order

SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000.00 posted by Mercis B.V. (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 Manish S. Shah on 1/25/2022. Notices mailed.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Plaintiff's ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order, asset restraint, expedited discovery, and electronic service of process 21 is 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 as to the defendants listed in the Second Amended Schedule A, 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 and causes consumer confusion. 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 $10,000 bond is sufficient to secure the injunction. Enter Sealed TRO. Notices mailed.

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. Sealed Exhibit 3 to the Declaration of Frank Padberg regarding memorandum in support of motion, [22]

MEMORANDUM In Support of [21] Renewed Ex Parte Motion

附件：

1:Declaration of Keith A. Vogt
2:Exhibit 1-4, Declaration of Keith Vogt
3:Declaration of Frank Padberg
4:Exhibit 1, Declaration of Frank Padberg
5:Exhibit 2, Declaration of Frank Padberg

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. Second Amended Schedule A to Complaint [1]

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: The motions to file under seal and for excess pages 8 10 are granted. If the defendants were alerted to the allegations, there is a risk that they will conceal their identities, prevent service, and defeat plaintiff's efforts to enjoin infringing activity. But the motion for a TRO 11 is denied without prejudice. The court is not persuaded that every accused product is infringing, and plaintiff may be overreaching to accuse any "cute bunny" of infringing the MIFFY trademark. For example, [13-2] at 93 in the context of the other products advertised on the same site, does not look like plaintiff's mark (at least to this viewer). Similarly, the mouths and eyes (and their spatial relationship to each other) of the rabbits in [13-2] at 122, [13-3] at 75, and [13-3] at 85, are different than plaintiff's marks. Some of the accused products are clearly infringing. E.g., [13-3] at 1. Plaintiff submitted over 3000 pages of screen shots, covering nearly 200 defendants. If even a few exhibits are not obviously infringing, this court is not going to entertain motions of this volume, unless plaintiff files a chart labeling each defendant, citing to the specific pages of the filed exhibit, and explaining why plaintiff believes the specific product is infringing. Alternatively, plaintiff can reduce the number of defendants to a manageable size that allows the court to review each screen shot to assess plaintiff's claim. If plaintiff files a new motion for a TRO, it must file a new complete set of filings and not rely on the exhibits filed to date. Notices mailed.

NOTICE by Yanling Jiang of Change of Address

NOTICE by Yi Bu of Change of Address

NOTICE by Adam Grodman of Change of Address

NOTICE by Keith A. Vogt of Change of Address

MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA.

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. Sealed Exhibit 3 to the Declaration of Frank Padberg regarding memorandum in support of motion, [12]

MEMORANDUM In Support of [11] Ex Parte Motion

附件：

1:Declaration of Keith A. Vogt
2:Exhibit 1-4, Declaration of Keith Vogt
3:Declaration of Frank Padberg
4:Exhibit 1, Declaration of Frank Padberg
5:Exhibit 2, Declaration of Frank Padberg

MOTION by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. for leave to file excess pages

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. Amended Schedule A [2] to Complaint [1]

MOTION by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. for leave to file [Certain] Documents 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.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Mercis B.V. by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Mercis B.V. by Yi Bu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Mercis B.V. by Yanling Jiang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Mercis B.V. by Keith A. Vogt

CIVIL Cover Sheet

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Mercis B.V. Schedule A to Complaint [1]

COMPLAINT filed by Mercis B.V.; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-19016548.

附件：

1:Exhibit 1
2:Exhibit 2
3:Exhibit 3
4:Exhibit 4
5:Exhibit 5