SATISFACTION of Judgment as to [Certain] defendants

SATISFACTION of Judgment as to Defendant no. 146 lvatr store

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

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

FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 12/12/2023. Mailed notice.

ORDER: No Defendant has responded to Plaintiff's motion (Dkt. 22) for entry of default judgment. Accordingly, the motion is granted. Because Defendants directly targettheir business activities toward consumers in the United States, including Illinois, this Court 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 Internet 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. 13, 14. 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 thusawarded. 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(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 motion (Dkt. 19) seeking a preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable John F. Kness on 12/12/2023. Mailed notice.

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

CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt regarding text entry, 26

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion 22 for entry of default and default judgment against all Defendants. All remaining Defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. Accordingly, default is entered under Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Any objections to the motion for entry of default judgment must be filed on or before 12/4/2023. If no objections are filed by that date, the Court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff must serve this minute order forthwith upon all remaining Defendants and must file proof of service. Mailed notice

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs CORRECTED Notice of Dismissal 24 as to certain defendants

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

MEMORANDUM by Svenja Schmitt in support of motion for default judgment 22

附件：

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

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

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Svenja Schmitt as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 10/31/2023, answer due 11/21/2023.

附件：

1:(Declaration of Service)

MEMORANDUM by Svenja Schmitt in support of motion for preliminary injunction 19

附件：

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

MOTION by Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt for preliminary injunction

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 10/20/2023. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal 10, motion for leave to file excess pages 11, and ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order and other relief 12 are granted. Plaintiff's submissions (e.g., Dkt. 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, 12, and 14. 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 using infringing and counterfeit versions of Plaintiff's trademarks 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 confusion caused by 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.

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt Sealed Exhibit 2, Declaration of Svenja Schmitt regarding memorandum in support of motion, 13

附件：

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

MEMORANDUM in support of 12 Exparte motion

附件：

1:Declaration of Keith A. Vogt
2:Exhibit 1-4, of Keith A. Vogt's declaration
3:Declaration of Svenja Schmitt
4:(Exhibit 1, of Svenja Schmitt's declaration)

MOTION by Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt for leave to file excess pages

MOTION by Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt for leave to file under seal

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt by Monica Rita Martin

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt by Cameron Eugene Mcintyre

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt by Yi Bu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt by Yanling Jiang

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 Sheila M. Finnegan. Case assignment: Random assignment.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt by Keith A. Vogt

CIVIL Cover Sheet

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Svenja Schmitt Schedule A to Complaint 1

COMPLAINT filed by Svenja Schmitt; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-20894223.

附件：

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