SATISFACTION of Judgment of Certain Doe Defendants

RETURN of U.S. Post Office Receipt, article no. 7008 1830 0000 4138 9097.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 11/22/2024. Mailed notice

ORDER: No defendant has responded to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment 39. The motion is granted. Based on the evidence submitted in support of the temporary restraining order and the motion for entry of default and default judgment, and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, plaintiff has established that the infringement was willful, that statutory damages should be awarded in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per defendant, and that a permanent injunction should be entered. Plaintiff has shown that the infringement of its marks and copyrights causes it irreparable harm in the form of diminished goodwill and brand confidence, damage to plaintiff's reputation, loss of exclusivity, and loss of future sales; that monetary damages are inadequate to address these harms; and that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction. No defendant has appeared to argue otherwise. Thus, the court also finds that the balance of the hardships favors an injunction. The ten-thousand dollars ($10,000) surety bond posted by plaintiff is hereby released to plaintiff's counsel. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the surety bond previously deposited with the Clerk of the Court to plaintiff's counsel David Lee Gulbransen of Law Office of David Gulbransen at 805 Lake Street, Suite 172, Oak Park, IL 60301, via certified mail. In light of the permanent injunction, plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, 26, is denied as moot. Enter Final Judgment Order. Terminate civil case. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 11/22/2024. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: No defendant has responded to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment, 39. By 11/27/2024, plaintiff should submit a proposed default judgment order and a track changes version of the same to the proposed order inbox, proposed_order_pacold@ilnd.uscourts.gov.

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Vincent Trinidad regarding set motion and R&R deadlines/hearings, 41

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Any defendant objecting to plaintiff's motion for entry of default and default judgment, 39, must enter an appearance and file a written objection by 11/12/2024. If no objections are filed, the court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice. Mailed notice

MEMORANDUM by VT, Vincent Trinidad in support of motion for default judgment 39

附件：

1:(Exhibit Exhibit 2)
2:Exhibit Exhibit 1
3:Declaration Declaration of David Gulbransen

MOTION by Plaintiffs VT, Vincent Trinidad for default judgment as to all remaining defendants

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants sixmoosemoose6, orient22_store, six-tealteal, ten-cosmo, seeksconnection_store, mustang-shimmer by Christopher Paul Keleher

Amended Schedule A by VT, Vincent Trinidad

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: This court's 9/17/2024 minute entry 35 is amended as follows: Plaintiff is directed to file an amended Schedule A form by 9/20/2024 identifying the remaining defendants.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notices of dismissal, 34 which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendants No. 38 A3NRUZ512P40PS, No. 39 AKISV14W9TZFF, No. 57 ACQBDQDY6UU29, No. 58 ACQBDQDY6UU29, No. 59 ACQBDQDY6UU29, and No. 60 ACQBDQDY6UU29 under Rule 41(a)(1). But Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dismissing some, but not all, parties to an action. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) ("Rule 41(a) should be limited to dismissal of an entire action."). The court therefore construes plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by removing these defendants from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff is directed to file an amended Schedule A form by 9/16/2024 identifying the remaining defendants.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs of Certain Doe Defendants

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court's previous order directed the plaintiff to submit a proposed order to the court's Proposed Order Inbox, 31. Plaintiff has not done so. By 9/9/2024, plaintiff should submit to the court's proposed order inbox, proposed_order_pacold@ilnd.uscourts.gov, a proposed order on plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, 26.

Revised Schedule A by VT, Vincent Trinidad Revised Schedule A

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal, 30, which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendants No. 16 SANGAROM, No. 20 BECGIESTICKER, No. 48 RAHUL MISHRA 1, No. 55 OxfordshireEngland, No. 85 RAHUL MISHRA 1 under Rule 41(a)(1). But Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dismissing some, but not all, parties to an action. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) ("Rule 41(a) should be limited to dismissal of an entire action."). The court therefore construes plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by removing these defendants from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff is directed to file an amended Schedule A form by 8/29/2024 identifying the remaining defendants. Additionally, by 8/29/2024, plaintiff shall comply with the procedures listed on the court's website and submit to the court's Proposed Order Inbox (Proposed_Order_Pacold@ilnd.uscourts.gov) a proposed order on plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, 29, along with a tracked changes version showing any differences between plaintiff's proposed order and the court's template order.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by VT, Vincent Trinidad of Certain Doe Defendants

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiffs VT, Vincent Trinidad regarding order on motion for preliminary injunction, text entry, 28

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has taken the motion for a preliminary injunction, 26, under advisement and will consider the motion unopposed if no defendant appears and objects by 8/29/24. Plaintiff shall serve defendants with this notice. Mailed notice.

MEMORANDUM by VT, Vincent Trinidad in support of motion for preliminary injunction 26

附件：

1:(Exhibit Exhibit to Declaration of David Gulbransen)
2:Declaration Declaration of David Gulbransen

MOTION by Plaintiffs VT, Vincent Trinidad for preliminary injunction

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiffs VT, Vincent Trinidad regarding sealed document 2, sealed document 13

SUMMONS Returned Executed by VT, Vincent Trinidad as to Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 8/21/2024, answer due 9/11/2024.

Amended Schedule A by VT, Vincent Trinidad

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notices of dismissal, 21, 22, which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendants No. 8 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 10 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 11 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 12 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 25 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 26 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 27 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 31 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 34 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 35 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 36 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 52 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 53 A22Y28E85AK67D, No. 14 AED3FR7HJL2S5, No. 54 AWZI6BA70DZZD, and No. 13 Bliss Monkey Co. under Rule 41(a)(1). But Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dismissing some, but not all, parties to an action. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) ("Rule 41(a) should be limited to dismissal of an entire action."). The court therefore construes plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by removing these defendants from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff is directed to file an amended Schedule A form by 8/19/2024 identifying the remaining defendants.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by VT, Vincent Trinidad of Certain Doe Defendants

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by VT, Vincent Trinidad of Certain Doe Defendants

INJUNCTION BOND in the amount of $ 10,000.00 posted by Vincent Trinidad.(Document not scanned)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's ex parte motion to extend the TRO, 17 is granted. Under Rule 65(b)(2), the court finds good cause to extend the TRO for an additional 14 days to prevent defendants from modifying registration data and content, changing hosts, redirecting traffic to other websites in their control, and moving any assets from accounts in U.S.-based financial institutions, including service provider accounts, to offshore accounts. The court's TRO, 16, entered on 7/26/2024 is extended until 8/23/2024.

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

MOTION by Plaintiffs VT, Vincent Trinidad for extension of time of Temporary Restraining Order

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 7/26/2024:

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: For the reasons set forth in the motions (6, 8, 9) filed by plaintiff, the supporting memorandum, 7, and the temporary restraining order, plaintiff's motions for leave to file excess pages, 8, motion to seal, 9, and motion for a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, and expedited discovery, and electronic service of process, 6, are granted. Plaintiff's filings support proceeding (for the time being) on an ex parte basis. Specifically, 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 accounting. In addition, the evidence submitted by plaintiff shows a substantial likelihood of success on the merits (including evidence of active infringement and sales into Illinois), the harm to plaintiff is irreparable, and an injunction is in the public interest. 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 other judges in this district have noted, there may be reason to question both the propriety of the joinder of all defendants in this one action and whether plaintiff genuinely intends to pursue an accounting, but at this preliminary stage, 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 revisit the asset freeze and joinder. Plaintiff shall deposit with the Clerk of Court ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), either cash or surety bond, as security.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: By 7/26/2024, plaintiff shall comply with the procedures listed on the court's website and submit to the court's Proposed Order Inbox (Proposed_Order_Pacold@ilnd.uscourts.gov) a proposed order and track changes version showing any differences between plaintiff's proposed order and the court's template order.

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiffs VT, Vincent Trinidad Schedule A to Amended Complaint

NEW PARTIES: Vincent Trinidad added to case caption.

AMENDED complaint by VT against Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

附件：

1:(Exhibit Exhibit 1)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has reviewed plaintiff's motion to file certain documents under seal and to temporarily proceed under a pseudonym, 5. The motion to file certain documents under seal and to temporarily proceed under a pseudonym, 5 is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff's submissions establish that, were defendants to learn of these proceedings before the execution of plaintiff's requested temporary restraining order, there is a significant risk that defendants could destroy relevant documentary evidence and hide or transfer assets beyond the reach of the court. Conversely, there are no exceptional circumstances that would justify allowing plaintiff to conceal its own identity. Given these protections for plaintiff's legitimate interests, the countervailing strong public interest in knowing who is seeking recourse in the federal courts compels the court to deny plaintiff's request to conceal its own identity, even initially. As the Seventh Circuit has explained, "We have repeatedly voiced our disfavor of parties proceeding anonymously, as anonymous litigation runs contrary to the rights of the public to have open judicial proceedings and to know who is using court facilities and procedures funded by public taxes. To proceed anonymously, a party must demonstrate exceptional circumstances that outweigh both the public policy in favor of identified parties and the prejudice to the opposing party that would result from anonymity." Doe v. Village of Deerfield, 819 F.3d 372, 376-77 (7th Cir. 2016). Accordingly, plaintiff must file an amended complaint disclosing its name and asserted copyrights by 7/26/24.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: By 7/15/24, plaintiff shall comply with the procedures listed on the court's website and submit to the court's Proposed Order Inbox (Proposed_Order_Pacold@ilnd.uscourts.gov) a proposed order and a track changes version showing any differences between plaintiff's proposed order and the court's template order.

MOTION by Plaintiff VT to seal document sealed document, 7

MOTION by Plaintiff VT for leave to file excess pages

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff VT Memorandum in Support of Motion for TRO

附件：

1:(Declaration Declaration of David Gulbransen)
2:Exhibit Exhibit 3 to Plaintiff's Declaration
3:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Plaintiff's Declaration (4 of 4)
4:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Plaintiff's Declaration (3 of 4)
5:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Plaintiff's Declaration (2 of 4)
6:Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Plaintiff's Declaration (1 of 4)
7:Exhibit Exhibit 1 to Plaintiff's Declaration
8:Declaration Declaration of Plaintiff

MOTION by Plaintiff VT for temporary restraining order

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 Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3).

MOTION by Plaintiff VT to seal document sealed document 2

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff VT by David Lee Gulbransen, Jr

CIVIL Cover Sheet

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff VT Complaint, Ex. 1, and Schedule A

附件：

1:Exhibit Exhibit 1
2:(Appendix Schedule A)

COMPLAINT filed by VT; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22176008.