ORDER ON PARTIES' MOTIONS TO REFUND POSTED BONDS Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 12/14/2023. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Plaintiff's motion to refund the posted bond (Dckt. No. 146) is hereby granted. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc., Counter Defendant Interfocus Inc. for bond Plaintiff's Motion to Refund Posted Bond

EMAILED copy of minute entry to the Fiscal Department of USDC.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Defendants' motion to refund posted bond (Dckt. No. 144) is hereby granted. The Court directs the Clerk's Office to refund the bond posted by Defendants on December 1, 2022. The earlier motion to refund the posted bond (Dckt. No. 140) is denied as duplicative. Mailed notice

MOTION by Defendants to refund posted bond.

MAILED copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC.

CERTIFIED copy of order dated 09/29/2023 from the 7th Circuit regarding notice of appeal 71 ; Appellate case no. : 22-3176; IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b).

MANDATE of USCA dated 09/29/2023 regarding notice of appeal 71 ; USCA No.22-3176; No record to be returned.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited TO REFUND POSTED BOND

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the Parties' Joint Request to Dismiss All Claims with Prejudice. (Dckt. No. 138) The parties have settled. As requested, the complaint is dismissed with prejudice. The Court declines the request to "retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement and all future infringement claims," for reasons explained in this Court's Standing Order. The case is closed. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice.

Parties Joint Request to Dismiss All Claims With Prejudice by Interfocus Inc.

附件：

1:(Text of Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Granting Parties' Joint Request to Dismiss All Claims with Prejudice)

STATUS Report JOINT STATUS REPORT by Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the joint status report. (Dckt. No. 135) The parties are continuing to talk and make progress. The parties must file another status report by September 22, 2023. The Court vacates all other deadlines in the meantime. Mailed notice

STATUS Report Parties' Further Joint Status Report Regarding Status of Settlement by Interfocus Inc.(a California Corporation)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the joint status report. (Dckt. No. 133) The parties have made additional progress on the settlement front. The parties are close. The parties must file another status report by August 29, 2023. The Court directs the parties to discuss settlement in good faith and with a sense of purpose. Mailed notice.

STATUS Report Parties Joint Status Report Regarding Status of Settlement by Interfocus Inc.(a California Corporation)

附件：

1:(Text of Proposed Order)

ANSWER to amended complaint, COUNTERCLAIM filed by Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd against Interfocus Inc.(a California Corporation), Shenzhen Yingfusi Technology Co., Ltd. by Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the joint status report. (Dckt. No. 127) The joint motion to set new case schedule (Dckt. No. 130) is hereby granted in part as follows. The parties have exchanged draft settlement agreements, but are in the process of continuing to iron out the details. The parties are "likely to complete settlement in the near future." The parties ask this Court to move the entire case calendar. Instead, the Court will order the following. The parties must file a joint status report by August 15, 2023. If the parties have not finalized the settlement at that point, then the Court would consider a short extension of the overall schedule. The Court directs the parties to continue to discuss settlement in good faith and in earnest. Mailed notice

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc., Counter Defendants Interfocus Inc., Interfocus Inc. for settlement (JOINT), MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc., Counter Defendants Interfocus Inc., Interfocus Inc. for extension of time TO SET NEW CASE SCHEDULE

SECOND AMENDED complaint by Interfocus Inc. against Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Holdings, Limited, Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A

附件：

1:(Exhibit 78A - 78D)
2:Exhibit 77A - 77D
3:Exhibit 76A - 76D
4:Exhibit 75A - 75D
5:Exhibit 73A - 74D
6:Exhibit 69A - 72

RESPONSE by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to order on motion for summary judgment, order on motion for extension of time, order on motion for leave to file, order on motion to seal document, text entry, 123 - Defendants' Response to the Court's June 20, 2023 Order

STATUS Report (JOINT) by Interfocus Inc.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the joint status report. (Dckt. No. 125) The parties "had reached settlement in principle" but are ironing out the details. The parties ask this Court to suspend all deadlines by 30 days. The Court extends all deadlines by 21 days, including all dates in the Order dated June 20, 2023. So, any amended complaint is due by July 21, 2023. The parties must file a status report by July 19, 2023. Defendants' motion to stay preliminary injunction pending appeal or increase bond (Dckt. No. 76) is hereby denied. Mailed notice.

STATUS Report Joint Status Report Regarding Status of Settlement by Interfocus Inc.

附件：

1:(Text of Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Re Parties' Joint Status Report Regarding Status of Settlement)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court directs all parties to meet and confer and engage in active settlement discussions by June 30, 2023. The parties must discuss settlement with a sense of urgency and a sense of purpose. The parties must file a status report by July 7, 2023, including whether they seek a settlement conference. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint (Dckt. No. 120) is granted in large part. On November 8, 2022, this Court adopted the proposed schedule and set a deadline of December 15, 2022 for any amended pleadings. (Dckt. No. 47) On April 20, 2023, four months after the deadline, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint, without mentioning that deadline. Plaintiff seeks to add new substantive allegations to the complaint. Since then, this Court has issued an opinion about Rule 41(a), including the need to file an amended complaint to dismiss a settling defendants. (Dckt. No. 122) So, the Court rules as follows. The Court grants Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint by June 30, 2023. The motion for leave to file amended answers (Dckt. No. 109) is hereby denied as moot in light of the forthcoming amended complaint. The parties must meet and confer about an updated case schedule, and must file a joint motion with a proposed case calendar by July 7, 2023. The stipulated motion to extend deadlines (Dckt. No. 108) is hereby denied as moot in light of the forthcoming change to the overall schedule. The motion for summary judgment (Dckt. No. 84) is hereby denied as moot in light of the forthcoming amended complaint. For now, the motion to seal (Dckt. No. 111) is tentatively granted. The motion, however, is terse and general, and would force this Court to do significant work to figure out if the documents deserve protection from public view. By June 30, 2023, defendants must show cause why the documents in question should not be unsealed. Mailed notice.

MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 6/7/2023. For the foregoing reasons, the motion for entry of stipulation to voluntary dismiss and for attorney service (Dckt. No. 93) is denied without prejudice. Mailed notice.

REPLY by Interfocus Inc. to MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for summary judgment 84 of Liability for Willful Copyright Infringement

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc., Counter Defendants Interfocus Inc., Interfocus Inc. for leave to file SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

附件：

1:(Text of Proposed Order [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT)
2:Exhibit H
3:Exhibit G
4:Exhibit F
5:Exhibit E
6:Exhibit D
7:Exhibit C
8:Exhibit B
9:Exhibit A-3
10:Exhibit A-2
11:Exhibit A-1

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The motion hearing set for April 19, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. is hereby vacated. Mailed notice.

Defendants' Affirmative Statement of Material Facts STATEMENT by Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited (Redacted)

RESPONSE by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to statement in support, 86

附件：

1:Exhibit 27
2:(Exhibit 28)
3:Exhibit 26
4:Exhibit 25
5:Exhibit 24
6:Exhibit 23
7:Exhibit 22
8:Exhibit 21
9:Exhibit 20
10:Exhibit 19
11:Exhibit 18
12:Exhibit 17
13:Exhibit 16
14:Exhibit 15
15:Exhibit 14
16:Exhibit 13.10
17:Exhibit 13.09
18:Exhibit 13.08
19:Exhibit 13.07
20:Exhibit 13.06
21:Exhibit 13.05
22:Exhibit 13.04
23:Exhibit 13.03
24:Exhibit 13.02
25:Exhibit 13.01
26:Exhibit 12
27:Exhibit 11
28:Exhibit 10
29:Exhibit 9
30:Supplement Index of Exhibits

RESPONSE by Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limitedin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for summary judgment 84 (Redacted)

附件：

1:(Declaration Rule 56(d))

SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited Defendants' Affirmative Statement of Material Facts

SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited Exhibits to Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts

附件：

1:Exhibit 19
2:Exhibit 18
3:Exhibit 17
4:Exhibit 16
5:Exhibit 15
6:Exhibit 11
7:Exhibit 10
8:Exhibit 20
9:Exhibit 21
10:Exhibit 22
11:(Exhibit 28)

SEALED RESPONSE Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment

NOTICE of Motion by Ziyong Li for presentment of motion to seal document 111 before Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 4/19/2023 at 09:00 AM.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to seal document (s)

NOTICE OF NEGOTIATIONS to Obviate the Need to Oppose Defendants' Motion for Leave To File Amended Answers by Interfocus (BVI) LTD., Interfocus Inc. to MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited for leave to file Amended Answers 109 Notice of Negotiations to Obviate the Need to Oppose Defendants' Motion (Docket Text modified by Clerk's Office). Modified on 4/5/2023.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited for leave to file Amended Answers

附件：

1:Exhibit A
2:Exhibit B
3:Exhibit C
4:Exhibit D
5:Exhibit E
6:Exhibit F
7:(Exhibit G)

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd., Hibobi Holdings, Limited, Hibobi Technology Limited for extension of time PARTIES' STIPULATED MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINES

STATUS Report Parties' Joint Status Report Regarding Status of Settlement by Interfocus Inc.

STIPULATION AND MOTION TO STAY

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Defendants' motion for leave to file excess pages (Dckt. No. 102) is granted. Mailed notice

Counterclaim Defendant Zhenzhen Yingfusi Technology Co. Ltd's ANSWER to counterclaim to the Amended Counterclaim of Hibobi Technology Ltd, Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co. (A.K.A. Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd), Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd by Interfocus Inc., Shenzhen Yingfusi Technology Co., Ltd.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Defendants' motion for extension of time (Dckt. No. 99) is hereby granted. Discovery is set to close on March 31, 2023. Defendants claim that they need more information before they can respond to the motion. The request for more time is granted. The response to the motion for summary judgment is due by April 14, 2023. As an aside, there was nothing wrong with Plaintiff filing an early motion for summary judgment. The Federal Rules allow a party to do that. And there was nothing wrong with Defendants asking for more time to gather the facts. The Federal Rules allow a party to do that, too. The Court has concerns that the parties are over-litigating the case. The parties must meet and confer on settlement, and must file a joint statement about the status of settlement discussions by February 20, 2023. Defendants' motion for leave to file under seal (Dckt. No. 101) is hereby granted. Defendants already filed a sealed, unredacted version and an unsealed, unredacted version on the docket. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited for leave to file excess pages

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited to seal under Local Rule 26.2

MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion for Extension of Time to Respond

附件：

1:Declaration of D. Poirier in Support of Motion
2:Exhibit Z-Search My Applications
3:Declaration of Li in Support of Motion
4:Exhibit A-Defs 1st RFPs to Interfocus
5:Exhibit B-Defs 1st ROGs to Interfocus
6:Exhibit C-Z. Liu Email
7:Exhibit D-Hibobi 2nd RFPs to Interfocus
8:Exhibit E-Hibobi 2nd ROGs to Interfocus
9:Exhibit F-Hibobi 1st RFAs to Interfocus
10:Exhibit G-Hibobi 3rd Set of ROGs
11:Exhibit H-Dircks Letter to Ivan
12:Exhibit I-Letter from Dircks to Ivan
13:Exhibit J
14:Exhibit K
15:Exhibit L
16:Exhibit M
17:Exhibit N-Email re Amended Answer
18:Exhibit O-Meet and Confer Follow Up
19:(Text of Proposed Order)

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited for extension of time to file response/reply as to memorandum in support of motion 85

SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited re Motion for Extension of Time

附件：

1:Declaration of Li in Support of Motion for Extension
2:Exhibit H - R. Dircks Letter to S. Ivan
3:Exhibit I - Letter from Dircks to Ivan
4:Exhibit J - Interfocus 000046-000055
5:Exhibit K - Interfocus 000056-000065
6:Exhibit L - Interfocus 000173
7:Exhibit M - Interfocus 000174
8:Exhibit N - Email re Amended Answer
9:(Exhibit O - Meet and Confer Follow Up)

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd.

ANSWER to amended complaint and Affirmative Defenses by Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd.

CERTIFICATE of Service by Defendants Hangzhou Haibaobei Technology Co., Ltd, Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Hibobi Technology Limited regarding answer to amended complaint, counterclaim, 69

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The stipulated motion for a briefing schedule (Dckt. No. 92) is hereby granted. As proposed, the response to Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is due by February 9, 2023, and the reply is due by March 2, 2023. Plaintiff's motion for electronic service of process pursuant to Rule 4(f)(3) (Dckt. No. 82) is hereby granted. The Court authorizes service of process on Defendant Hangzhou Jiulong Technology Co. Ltd. by the alternate means stated in the motion. The motion to seal (Dckt. No. 88) is hereby granted. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Hibao Technology Co., Ltd, Counter Claimant Hibobi Technology Limited for Entry of Stipulation to Volntarily Dismiss and for Attorney Service (JOINT MOTION)

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to set a briefing schedule (AGREED AND STIPULATED)

ANSWER TO AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF HIBOBI TECHNOLOGY LTD, HANZHOU HAIBAOBEI TECHNOLOGY CO. (A.K.A. HANGZHOU HIBABY TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD) AND HANZHOU HIBAO TECHNOLOGY CO. LTD. ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Interfocus Inc.(a California Corporation)

ANNUAL REMINDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 (Notification of Affiliates), any nongovernmental party, other than an individual or sole proprietorship, must file a statement identifying all its affiliates known to the party after diligent review or, if the party has identified no affiliates, then a statement reflecting that fact must be filed. An affiliate is defined as follows: any entity or individual owning, directly or indirectly (through ownership of one or more other entities), 5% or more of a party. The statement is to be electronically filed as a PDF in conjunction with entering the affiliates in CM/ECF as prompted. As a reminder to counsel, parties must supplement their statements of affiliates within thirty (30) days of any change in the information previously reported. This minute order is being issued to all counsel of record to remind counsel of their obligation to provide updated information as to additional affiliates if such updating is necessary. If counsel has any questions regarding this process, this LINK will provide additional information. Signed by the Executive Committee on 12/29/2022: Mailed notice.

DECLARATION of (AMENDED) Mark Lee regarding motion for miscellaneous relief 82, memorandum in support of motion, 83 FOR ELECTRONIC SERVICE OF PROCESS

MOTION by Counter Defendant Interfocus Inc., Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. to seal PREVIOUSLY FILED DECLARATION OF MARK S. LEE (DOCKET NOS. 83-1 thru 83-3) IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ELECTRONIC SERVICE OF PROCESS PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 4(f)(3)

REPLY by Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal or Increase Bond 76

STATEMENT by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc.in Support of MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for summary judgment 84

附件：

1:Exhibit 1 to Statement of Material Facts
2:Exhibit 2 to Statement of Material Facts
3:Exhibit 3 to Statement of Material Facts
4:Exhibit 4 to Statement of Material Facts
5:Exhibit 5 to Statement of Material Facts
6:Exhibit 6 to Statement of Material Facts
7:Exhibit 7 to Statement of Material Facts
8:(Exhibit 8 to Statement of Material Facts)

MEMORANDUM by Interfocus Inc. in support of motion for summary judgment 84

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for summary judgment

MEMORANDUM by Interfocus Inc. in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 82 for Electronic Service of Process

附件：

1:Declaration of Mark Lee in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Electronic Service of Process
2:Exhibit 1 to Declaration of Mark Lee
3:(Exhibit 2 to Declaration of Mark Lee)

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc.for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3)

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited by Rebecca L Dircks

RESPONSE by Interfocus Inc.(a California Corporation)in Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal or Increase Bond 76

附件：

1:(Declaration Declaration of Robert Rosenblum in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants Motion to Stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal or Increase Bond)

FIRST AMENDED ANSWER to amended complaint, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, and COUNTERCLAIM filed by Hibobi Technology Limited, Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd. against All Plaintiffs. by Hibobi Technology Limited, Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd.

Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement STATEMENT by Interfocus Inc.

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT by Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited of Motion to Stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal or Increase Bond

附件：

1:(Declaration Fifth Declaration of Z. Liu)

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal or Increase Bond

ACKNOWLEDGMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal 71 ; USCA Case No. 22-3176.

ORDER Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 12/2/2022. Mailed notice.

TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on notice of appeal 71. Notified counsel.

NOTICE of Appeal Due letter sent to counsel of record regarding notice of appeal 71.

NOTICE of appeal by Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited regarding orders 66, 65 Filing fee $ 505, receipt number AILNDC-20103446. Receipt number: n

Check BOND in the amount of $ $200,000 posted by The Defendants Identified in Schedule A

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Defendants' motion to deposit money (Dckt. No. 67) is hereby granted. Defendants shall deposit with the Court two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00), either cash, surety bond, or law firm check. The Clerk of Court is to deposit the funds into the Court Registry until further order of the Court. The Court also reviewed and appreciated receiving Plaintiff's explanation for the filing of a verified complaint. (Dckt. No. 68). Mailed notice.

Defendants' ANSWER to amended complaint, Affirmative Defenses, and COUNTERCLAIM filed by Hibobi Technology Limited, Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd. against Interfocus Inc. and Shenzhen Yingfusi Technology Co., Ltd. by Hibobi Technology Limited, Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd.

Response to Minute Entry by Interfocus Inc.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to deposit funds

附件：

1:(Exhibit A - Registry Deposit Information Form)

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 11/28/2022. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction (Dckt. No. 26) is hereby granted as follows. This Court presided over a preliminary injunction hearing on November 17, 2022. This Court posed a number of questions, and directed the parties to file a number of supplemental submissions (which they later did). The Court has reviewed those submissions. The record includes a number of examples of infringing products appearing on Defendants' website. Based on the record, the Court finds that Plaintiff Interfocus has met its burden for obtaining a preliminary injunction. Plaintiff has established that it has a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits, and that it will suffer irreparable harm with no adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff also has demonstrated that its anticipated injury outweighs any harm that may be inflicted on the Defendants from an injunction. An injunction will be consistent with the public interest, too. Defendants point to the fact that they have repeatedly taken down infringing products after receiving notice from Plaintiff. Maybe so. But that history merely underscores the recurring nature of the infringing conduct. The Court finds that the request for an injunction is not moot in light of the recurring pattern of infringing conduct on Defendants' website. Given the pattern of repeated violations, the Court finds that there is a significant risk of imminent future violations. Defendants' own submission (Dckt. No. 59) confirms the existence of the recurring violations. The sales may not be huge, but they are enough to warrant injunctive relief. Plaintiff did not unduly delay its request for injunctive relief. The parties have agreed that Defendants will post a $200,000 bond in lieu of an asset freeze. Defendants must post that bond by December 2, 2022. In the meantime, the asset freeze remains in place. Preliminary Injunction Order to follow. Mailed notice

MAIL RETURNED, for document # 22 sent to Eric Charles Cohen returned as undeliverable, return to sender. No new contact information received; therefore future mailings will not be sent until a new address is provided to the Clerk's Office using a Notification of Change of Address or Pro Se Appearance form.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Under Rule 11(a), a pleading "need not be verified" unless "a rule or statute specifically states otherwise." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a). Plaintiff filed a verification. (Dckt. No. 55) Is plaintiff's counsel aware of a rule or statute that required a verification. The Court requires a short response (a paragraph is enough) by November 30, 2022. The motion to seal (Dckt. No. 60) is hereby granted. The pro hac vice motion (Dckt. No. 56) is hereby granted. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Status hearing held on November 17, 2022. The Court set a number of interim deadlines for resolving a few pending issues. As discussed at the hearing, by 3:00 p.m. on Nov. 18th, each party shall file a supplemental statement answering the Court's questions. Counsel shall address how many infringing images from the amended complaint are currently on defendants' website, and must include a list of images that have been removed. The supplemental filing should address the asset freeze issue as well, meaning whether a bond would suffice. Counsel shall address whether the Court can issue preliminary injunctive relief if the infringing activity is no longer ongoing. The motion for a preliminary injunction (Dckt. No. 26) is taken under advisement. Mailed notice

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 11/17/2022 before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger. Order Number: 44577. Court Reporter Contact Information: Amy Spee, amyofficialtranscripts@gmail.com. IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings. Redaction Request due 12/12/2022. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 12/22/2022. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 2/20/2023.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A to seal document sealed document, 59 Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 to Supplemental Brief

SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A Sealed Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 to Supplemental Brief

附件：

1:Exhibit 2
2:(Exhibit 3)

RESPONSE by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A to sealed response, 33 Supplemental Brief Regarding Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

附件：

1:Declaration of Z Liu
2:Declaration of Z Li
3:Exhibit 1
4:Exhibit 2
5:Exhibit 3
6:(Exhibit 4)

SUPPLEMENTAL Brief in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc.

附件：

1:Exhibit 69
2:Exhibit 70
3:Supplement Schedule A
4:Declaration of Zheng Liu
5:(Text of Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Granting Preliminary Injunction) (Docket Text Modified on 11/21/2022)

MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AILNDC-20060334.

Verification Re Plaintiff's Amended Complaint by Interfocus Inc.

JURY Demand

AMENDED complaint by Interfocus Inc. against Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A

附件：

1:Exhibit 1
2:Exhibit 2
3:Exhibit 3
4:Exhibit 4
5:Exhibit 5
6:Exhibit 7
7:Exhibit 8
8:Exhibit 9
9:Exhibit 10
10:Exhibit 11
11:Exhibit 12
12:Exhibit 13
13:Exhibit 14
14:Exhibit 15
15:Exhibit 16
16:Exhibit 17
17:Exhibit 18
18:Exhibit 19
19:Exhibit 20
20:Exhibit 21
21:Exhibit 22
22:Exhibit 23
23:Exhibit 24
24:Exhibit 25
25:Exhibit 26
26:Exhibit 27
27:Exhibit 28
28:Exhibit 29
29:Exhibit 30
30:Exhibit 31
31:Exhibit 32
32:Exhibit 33
33:Exhibit 34
34:Exhibit 35
35:Exhibit 36
36:Exhibit 37
37:Exhibit 39
38:Exhibit 41
39:Exhibit 42
40:Exhibit 43
41:Exhibit 44
42:Exhibit 45
43:Exhibit 46
44:Exhibit 47
45:Exhibit 48
46:Exhibit 49
47:Exhibit 50
48:Exhibit 51
49:Exhibit 52
50:Exhibit 53
51:Exhibit 54
52:Exhibit 55
53:Exhibit 56
54:Exhibit 57
55:Exhibit 58
56:Exhibit 59
57:Exhibit 60
58:Exhibit 61
59:Exhibit 62
60:Exhibit 63
61:Exhibit 64
62:Exhibit 65
63:Exhibit 66
64:Exhibit 67
65:Exhibit 68
66:Errata 100
67:Exhibit 101
68:Exhibit 102
69:Exhibit 103
70:Exhibit 104
71:Exhibit 105
72:Exhibit 106
73:Exhibit 107
74:Exhibit 108
75:Exhibit 109
76:(Supplement Schedule A)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The motion for leave to appear pro hac vice (Dckt. No. 51) is granted. Attorney Zheng Liu is added as counsel for Interfocus Inc. Mailed notice.

MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AILNDC-20042398.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Defendants' motion to supplement the joint initial status report (Dckt. No. 49) is hereby denied. Defendants basically explain that they were still gathering evidence about the case. That's a reason to ask for more time. That's not a reason to phone it in when doing a court filing. To be clear, this Court has not barred Defendants from advancing defenses. This Court simply noted that Defendants made no apparent effort to articulate them in the Court-ordered filing. Going forward, the Court expects full compliance with Court deadlines. The Scheduling Order (Dckt. No. 47) remains in place. Mailed notice.

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited to supplement initial joint status report

附件：

1:Exhibit A
2:(Exhibit B)

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 11/8/2022. Mailed notice.

SCHEDULING ORDER UNDER RULE 16(b) Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 11/8/2022. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the joint initial status report. (Dckt. No. 42) This Court directed the parties to provide answers to a specific list of questions. One of the questions required Defendants to describe their affirmative defenses and counterclaims. Defendants responded that they "reserve the right to assert affirmative defenses and counterclaims." That non-responsive response tells this Court one of two things (if not both). One option is that Defendants decided that answering this Court's questions was not worth the trouble. Another option is that Defendants don't have any defenses. Defendants gave that answer a number of times, which tells this Court that Defendants did not participate in good faith. The Court adopts Plaintiff's proposed schedule. Fact discovery will close by March 31, 2023. Scheduling Order to follow. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction hearing (Dckt. No. 26) is hereby granted in part as follow. A status hearing is set for November 17, 2022 at 10:30 a.m. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing. The call-in number is (888) 684-8852 and the access code is 9369830. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Plaintiff's motion for a protective order (Dckt. No. 41) is hereby granted. For now, the Court adopts the version proposed by Plaintiff, because the version offered by Defendants seems unduly restrictive. Defendants' version reads as if any confidential information (e.g., anything that is "not generally known to others and has significant competitive value") is presumptively entitled to the highest level of confidentiality protection. Down the road, if Defendants can offer a specific reason why a particular document, or a particular category of documents, cannot be shared with anyone other than lawyers, the Defendants can file a motion. But for now, the Court adopts the less restrictive version. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Defendants' motion to dismiss (Dckt. No. 36) is hereby denied. Defendants argue that the complaint is not specific enough because it referred generally to "images on Defendant's website," and to "Counterfeit InterFocus Products." But a lack of specificity is a reason to serve discovery, or perhaps file a motion for a more definite statement. The complaint is not granular, but it offers enough details to overcome the low hurdle of Rule 12(b)(6). Defendants' motion to seal (Dckt. No. 35) is hereby granted. Mailed notice

Rule 26(f) Report for Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) Joint Initial Status Report Under Rule 26(f), filed by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc.

附件：

1:(Text of Proposed Order [Parties Proposed] Scheduling Order Under Rule 16(b))

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for protective order

附件：

1:Exhibit A
2:Exhibit B
3:Exhibit C
4:(Exhibit D)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Defendants' motion for leave to file a sur-reply (Dckt. No. 39) is hereby denied. Mailed notice

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited for leave to file - Defendants' Contingent Motion for Leave to File a Sur-Reply

REPLY by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. to sealed response, 33, motion for preliminary injunction, 26 ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, TO EXPEDITE THE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING, AND TO EXTEND THE OCTOBER 4, 2022 TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

附件：

1:Declaration of Sandi Graham
2:Declaration of Jenny Houston
3:Exhibit 1
4:Exhibit 2
5:Exhibit 3
6:Exhibit 4A
7:Exhibit 4B
8:Exhibit 4C
9:Exhibit 5A
10:Exhibit 5B
11:Exhibit 5C
12:Exhibit 6B
13:Exhibit 6C
14:Exhibit 7
15:Exhibit 8A
16:Exhibit 8B
17:Exhibit 8C
18:Exhibit 9A
19:Exhibit 9B
20:(Exhibit 9C)

MEMORANDUM in Support of Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss by Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A

附件：

1:(Declaration of Ziyong Li)

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A Partial Motion to Dismiss

MOTION by Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A to seal 33 Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, to Expedite the Preliminary Injunction Hearing, and to Extend the October 4, 2022 Temporary Restraining Order

RESPONSE by Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule Ain Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for preliminary injunction to expedite the Preliminary Injunction Hearing, and to Extend the October 4, 2022 Temporary Restraining Order 26 (Redacted Version)

附件：

1:Declaration of Liu
2:Declaration II of Liu
3:Declaration of Ziyong Li
4:Exhibit A
5:Exhibit B
6:Exhibit C
7:Exhibit D
8:Exhibit E
9:Exhibit F
10:Exhibit G
11:Exhibit H
12:Exhibit I
13:Exhibit J
14:Exhibit K
15:Exhibit L
16:Exhibit M
17:Exhibit N
18:Exhibit O
19:Exhibit P
20:Exhibit Q
21:Exhibit R
22:Exhibit S
23:Exhibit T
24:Exhibit U
25:Exhibit V
26:(Exhibit W)

SEALED RESPONSE by Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited, The Defendants Identified in Schedule A to MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for preliminary injunction to expedite the Preliminary Injunction Hearing, and to Extend the October 4, 2022 Temporary Restraining Order 26

附件：

1:Declaration of Liu
2:Declaration II of Liu
3:Exhibit B
4:Exhibit C
5:Exhibit D
6:Exhibit F
7:Exhibit G
8:Exhibit H
9:Exhibit I
10:Exhibit J
11:Exhibit O
12:Exhibit Q
13:Exhibit R
14:Exhibit S
15:Exhibit T
16:Exhibit U
17:(Exhibit V)

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The motion for leave to appear pro hac vice (Dckt. No. 28) is granted. Attorney Ziyong Li is added as counsel for Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd. and Hibobi Technology Limited. Mailed notice.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited by Shandice Theresa Sluch

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Hangzhou Hibaby Technology Co., Ltd., Hibobi Technology Limited by Kalpesh K Shah

MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AILNDC-19964892.

REGISTRY DEPOSIT INFORMATION FORM by Interfocus Inc.

BOND in the amount of $ 10,000.00 cashier's check receipt number 4624277820 posted by Interfocus Inc.

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for preliminary injunction to expedite the Preliminary Injunction Hearing, and to Extend the October 4, 2022 Temporary Restraining Order Modified on 11/19/2022.

附件：

1:(Text of Proposed Order Extending Expiration of Temporary Restraining Order Until November 1, 2022, and Requiring Defendants to Respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction)

CERTIFICATE of Service Re Sealed Temporary Restraining Order and All Other Documents Filed in Case by Eric Charles Cohen on behalf of Interfocus Inc.

RESPONSE by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. to text entry, 23

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court notes that this Schedule A case includes only two defendants in the attached schedule. By October 7, 2022, Plaintiff must show cause why the caption should not be changed, with the phrase "Defendants Identified in Schedule A" replaced with the names of the two defendants. Mailed notice

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 10/4/2022. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal (Dckt. No. 2) is hereby granted. Plaintiff's second motion for leave to file under seal (Dckt. No. 8) is hereby granted. Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order (Dckt. No. 9) is hereby denied as moot in light of the later-filed motion. Plaintiff's second motion for a temporary restraining order (Dckt. No. 15) is hereby granted in part as stated in the forthcoming order. Temporary Restraining Order to follow. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to file joint status report (Dckt. No. 16) is hereby granted. Plaintiff must effectuate service of process by October 7, 2022. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger:Plaintiff's motion for an extension (Dckt. No. 18) is hereby denied as moot, given that Plaintiff filed the response (Dckt. No. 19). Mailed notice.

Plaintiff Interfocus Inc.'s Response to Minute Entry Dkt. 17 by Interfocus Inc.

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for extension of time

附件：

1:(Text of Proposed Order Order Granting Motion for Extension of Time)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed Plaintiff's motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order (Dckt. No. 9). The proposed minute order includes a request for an asset freeze. By August 19, 2022, Plaintiff must file a statement and point to the statutory provision that gives this Court the power to impose an asset freeze at the outset of the case. If Plaintiff cannot point to a specific statutory provision, then Plaintiff must address how its request for an asset freeze is consistent with Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo S.A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc., 527 U.S. 308 (1999). In its memo, Plaintiff argues that "[c]ourts have the inherent authority to issue a prejudgment asset restraint when plaintiff's complaint seeks relief in equity." See Mem., at 13. In Grupo Mexicano, the Supreme Court held that a district court has "no authority to issue a preliminary injunction preventing [a defendant] from disposing of their assets pending adjudication of [plaintiff's] contract claim for money damages." Id. at 333. The Supreme Court adhered to the long-standing rule that "a judgment establishing the debt was necessary before a court of equity would interfere with the debtor's use of his property." Id. at 321. "However, the [Grupo] [C]ourt specifically noted that a restraint on assets was still proper if a suit sought equitable relief." See CSC Holdings, Inc. v. Redisi, 309 F.3d 988, 996 (7th Cir. 2002) (citing Grupo, 527 U.S. at 333; Deckert v. Independence Shares Corp., 311 U.S. 282, 288 (1940)). "[A]s a general matter [] prejudgment asset restraints are not proper simply to establish a fund from which a later award of money damages can be satisfied." See Banister v. Firestone, 2018 WL 4224444, at *9 (N.D. Ill. 2018). An equitable restraint at the outset of the case might be doable if Plaintiff obtained equitable monetary relief at the end of the day, like an accounting of profits. See Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, 2013 WL 12314399 (N.D. Ill. 2013). But as a practical matter, in Schedule A cases, that recovery almost never happens, if at all. Instead, plaintiffs rush into court, seek and obtain an asset freeze, obtain a default judgment, and then ask district courts to unfreeze the money and award statutory damages, not equitable relief. In that scenario, it is not clear to this Court that it would be appropriate to use any frozen funds for any recovery of statutory damages, because statutory damages are a remedy at law, not a remedy in equity. If Plaintiff believes that it is appropriate for this Court to freeze funds at the outset of the case, and then use those funds to recover statutory damages (not equitable monetary relief) at the end of the case, then Plaintiff must explain why. Mailed notice

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for extension of time for Filing Joint Status Report and Proposed Scheduling Order Until 30-Days After Court Rules on Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for TRO

MOTION by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. for temporary restraining order

附件：

1:Exhibit A
2:Exhibit B
3:(Exhibit C)

Copyright Registration Numbers by Interfocus Inc.

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. to Declaration of Robert Rosenblum in Support of Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion forEntry of a Temporary Restraining Order Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint and Expedited Discovery regarding memorandum in support of motion, 10

附件：

1:Exhibit 1B
2:Exhibit 1C
3:Exhibit 1D
4:Exhibit 2B
5:Exhibit 2C
6:Exhibit 2D
7:Exhibit 3B
8:Exhibit 3C
9:Exhibit 3D
10:Exhibit 4B
11:Exhibit 4D
12:Exhibit 5B
13:Exhibit 5C
14:Exhibit 5D
15:Exhibit 7B
16:Exhibit 7C
17:Exhibit 7D
18:Exhibit 8B
19:Exhibit 8C
20:Exhibit 9B
21:Exhibit 9C
22:Exhibit 9D
23:Exhibit 10B
24:Exhibit 10C
25:Exhibit 10D
26:Exhibit 11B
27:Exhibit 11D
28:Exhibit 12B
29:Exhibit 12D
30:Exhibit 14B
31:Exhibit 14C
32:Exhibit 14D
33:Exhibit 14B
34:Exhibit 14C
35:Exhibit 14D
36:Exhibit 15B
37:Exhibit 15C
38:Exhibit 15D
39:Exhibit 16B
40:Exhibit 16C
41:Exhibit 16D
42:Exhibit 17B
43:Exhibit 17C
44:Exhibit 17D
45:Exhibit 18B
46:Exhibit 18C
47:Exhibit 18D
48:Exhibit 19B
49:Exhibit 19C
50:Exhibit 19D
51:Exhibit 20B
52:Exhibit 20C
53:Exhibit 20D
54:Exhibit 21B
55:Exhibit 22C
56:Exhibit 21D
57:Exhibit 22B
58:Exhibit 22C
59:Exhibit 22D
60:Exhibit 23B
61:Exhibit 23C
62:Exhibit 23D
63:Exhibit 24B
64:Exhibit 24C
65:Exhibit 24D
66:Exhibit 25B
67:Exhibit 25C
68:Exhibit 25D
69:Exhibit 26B
70:Exhibit 26C
71:Exhibit 26D
72:Exhibit 27B
73:Exhibit 27C
74:Exhibit 27D
75:Exhibit 28B
76:Exhibit 28C
77:Exhibit 28D
78:Exhibit 29B
79:Exhibit 29C
80:Exhibit 29D
81:Exhibit 30B
82:Exhibit 30C
83:Exhibit 30DE
84:Exhibit 31B
85:Exhibit 31C
86:Exhibit 31D
87:Exhibit 32B
88:Exhibit 32C
89:Exhibit 32D
90:Exhibit 33B
91:Exhibit 33C
92:Exhibit 33D
93:Exhibit 34B
94:Exhibit 34C
95:Exhibit 34D
96:Exhibit 35B
97:Exhibit 35C
98:Exhibit 35D
99:Exhibit 36B
100:Exhibit 36C
101:Exhibit 36D
102:Exhibit 37B
103:Exhibit 37C
104:Exhibit 37D
105:Exhibit 39B
106:Exhibit 39D
107:Exhibit 41B
108:Exhibit 41D
109:Exhibit 42B
110:Exhibit 42D
111:Exhibit 43B
112:Exhibit 43D
113:Exhibit 44B
114:(Exhibit 44D)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. to Declaration of Sandi Graham in Support of Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Entry of a Temporary Restraining Order Including a Temporary Injunction, a Tempoary Asset Restraining, and Expedited Discovery regarding memorandum in support of motion, 10

附件：

1:Exhibit 4
2:Exhibit 5
3:Exhibit 6
4:(Exhibit 7)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Interfocus Inc. Sealed Declaration of Amanda Richardson-Golden in Support of Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for entry of a Temporary Restraining Order, Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery and Exs. 1-6 regarding memorandum in support of motion, 10

附件：

1:Exhibit 1
2:Exhibit 2
3:Exhibit 3
4:Exhibit 4
5:Exhibit 5
6:(Exhibit 6)