SEALED ORDER Signed by the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings on 10/10/2025.Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal [12] and ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, expedited discovery, and for electronic service of process [9] are granted as to Amended Schedule A. Plaintiff's submissions 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 file under seal the documents identified in the motion to seal. The Temporary Restraining Order being entered in due course shall also be placed under seal. In addition, for the purpose of the motions cited above, plaintiff's filings support proceeding on an ex parte basis at this time. Specifically, and as noted above, were defendants to be informed of this proceeding before a TRO could issue, the Court finds that it is likely that their 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 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. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and to implement the asset freeze. Plaintiff shall submit an amended proposed TRO reflecting only the defendants on Amended Schedule A by 10/3/25. Mailed notice

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff KI Corporation Memorandum In Support of Joinder

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff KI Corporation Exhibit 4 to Complaint

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff KI Corporation Schedule A

Unredacted AMENDED complaint by KI Corporation against The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified in Schedule A

附件：

1:Ex. 3
2:Ex. 2
3:Ex. 1

MOTION by Plaintiff KI Corporation for leave to file documents under seal Renewed Motion

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file excess pages 8 is granted. Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order 9 is entered and continued generally. Upon review of the complaint and the TRO submissions, the Court sua sponte raises the proprietary of joinder of over 50 defendants in this case. See, e.g. Estee Lauder Cosmetics Ltd. v. Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182 (N.D.Ill. 2020). By 9/26/25, plaintiff shall file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder in light of the principles described in Estee Lauder. In the alternative, plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint with a smaller subset of defendants along with its memorandum explaining specifically why each defendant is properly joined to all of the others. Estee Lauder, 334 F.R.D. at 189. Tracking status hearing set for 10/31/25 at 9:00 a.m. to track the case only (no appearance is required and the case will not be called). Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: This case has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Jeffrey I. Cummings. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal 4 is granted in part and denied in part. At a minimum, plaintiff's submissions 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's requests to seal certain documents is granted. However, plaintiff's request to proceed anonymously is denied. As the Seventh Circuit has explained, "[w]e 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); see also Doe v. Smith, 429 F.3d 706, 710 (7th Cir. 2005) ("[T]his circuit's decisions. disfavor anonymous litigation."); Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wis., 112 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir. 1997) ("Identifying the parties to the proceeding is an important dimension of publicness. The people have a right to know who is using their courts."). Here, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite "exceptional circumstances" to warrant proceeding anonymously under the factual scenario presented by this case. Further, and more importantly, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the safeguards already in place will not otherwise protect its interest in enforcing his rights. See XYZ Corp. v. Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 21-CV-06471, 2022 WL 180151, at *2 (N.D.Ill. Jan. 20, 2022) ("There is insufficient evidence. that Schedule A defendants are taking advantage of the case-tracking option to such an extent that it is materially impeding brand owners' enforcement efforts."). Mailed notice

SEALED MOTION by Plaintiff KI Corporation for Entry of a Temporary Restraining Order, Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, Expedited Discovery, and Alternative Service

附件：

1:(Ex. 2 Pt. 1)
2:Ex. 1
3:Declaration of Plaintiff
4:Declaration of James Judge
5:Brief in Support of Motion

MOTION by Plaintiff KI Corporation for leave to file excess pages

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff KI Corporation by Zareefa Burki Flener

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff KI Corporation by Ying Chen

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff KI Corporation Unredacted Complaint

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 Jeffrey I Cummings. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Albert Berry, III. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2).

MOTION by Plaintiff KI Corporation for leave to file documents under seal

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff KI Corporation by James Edward Judge

CIVIL Cover Sheet

COMPLAINT filed by KI Corporation; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23748155.

附件：

1:Ex.3
2:Ex.2
3:Schedule A
4:Ex.1