| 8 | 2026-06-30 | MINUTES: MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: This case has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Jeffrey I. Cummings. The Court notes that plaintiff has presented evidence of completed purchases of the allegedly infringing products to customers in Illinois, (Dckt. #1-4). See Liu v. Monthly, 170 F.4th 1090 (7th Cir. 2026). Plaintiff's motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, and expedited discovery [4] is granted. 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. 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. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and to implement the asset freeze. Plaintiff must submit a proposed TRO to the Court's proposed order inbox (Proposed_Order_Cummings@ilnd.uscourts.gov) by 7/2/26. The Court notes that plaintiff has not sought leave to serve defendants electronically. If plaintiff intends to do so, any such motion should be filed by 7/17/26 and must comply with the Seventh Circuit's ruling in Kangol LLC v. Hangzhou Chuanyue Silk Imp. & Exp. Co., -- F.4th ---, 2026 WL 1502198 (7th Cir. May 29, 2026). In Kangol, the Seventh Circuit held that the Hague Service Convention "prohibits service by email in China." Kangol, 2026 WL 1502198, at *6. The Court acknowledged, however, that the Convention does not apply if the defendant's address is unknown. Id. at *4. "[C]ourts handling Schedule A cases typically require plaintiffs to make 'reasonably diligent efforts to ascertain and verify [the] defendant's mailing address' before deeming the defendant's address unknown." Id., quoting NBA Props., Inc. v. P'ships and Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified in Schedule "A", 549 F. Supp. 3d 790, 796 (N.D.Ill. 2021). Status hearing is set for 8/17/26 at 9:00 a.m. to track the case only. (to track the case only, no appearance is required). Mailed notice |
| — | 2026-04-16 | ADMIN: 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. (Text entry; no document attached.) |