墨婷跨境
MOT CROSS-BORDER
微信号: Mooting2018
墨婷跨境
MOT CROSS-BORDER
| 编号 | 日期 | 案件进程 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2026-08-10 | COMPLAINT filed by Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix, Inc., Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix US, LLC; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-25508259. |
| 4 | 2026-08-10 | MOTION by Plaintiffs Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. for leave to file under seal |
| 5 | 2026-08-10 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 6 | 2026-08-10 | NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. |
| 7 | 2026-08-10 | Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. |
| 8 | 2026-08-10 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. by Justin R. Gaudio |
| 9 | 2026-08-10 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. by Amy Crout Ziegler |
| 10 | 2026-08-10 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. by Kahlia Roe Halpern |
| 11 | 2026-08-10 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. by Madeline Halgren |
| — | 2026-08-11 | 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. |
| 12 | 2026-08-11 | MOTION by Plaintiffs Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. for temporary restraining order including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery |
| 13 | 2026-08-11 | MEMORANDUM by Netflix Studios, LLC, Netflix US, LLC, Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, Netflix, Inc. in support of motion for temporary restraining order, [12] |
| 14 | 2026-08-11 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[13] |
| 15 | 2026-08-11 | DECLARATION of Jen Dirks regarding memorandum in support of motion[13] |
| 17 | 2026-08-11 | NOTICE of Motion by Justin R. Gaudio for presentment of motion for leave to file[4], motion for temporary restraining order, [12] before Honorable Manish S. Shah on 8/18/2026 at 09:45 AM. |
| 18 | 2026-08-18 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: The motions for leave to file under seal [4] and for entry of a temporary restraining order [12] are taken under advisement. The court will issue a ruling via cm/ecf. Notices Mailed. |
| 19 | 2026-09-02 | MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. |
| 20 | 2026-09-09 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: The motion to file under seal [4] is granted, but the motion for an ex parte TRO and expedited discovery [12] is denied. This court declines to consider ex parte sealed filings in these "Schedule A" cases involving this many defendants. The sealed filings in such cases are too burdensome to review and plaintiff's boilerplate concerns about defendants redirecting account information and assets if proceedings are not ex parte or sealed have lost persuasive force (even though supported by anecdotal experience of counsel) when balanced against the public right to court access. Going forward, more than 10 defendants or more than 60 pages of sealed exhibits is probably too many for prompt review. Without the benefit of adversarial presentation, this court declines to make a definitive judgment about joinder, but tentatively concludes that defendants selling products with no obvious relationship to other defendants' products are not properly joined (e.g., one defendant selling a Lady Whistledown keychain should not be joined with defendants selling "Bridgeton" [not Bridgerton] placemats), but will await adversarial presentation before deciding the question in this case. Plaintiff can either renew the request for an ex parte TRO against fewer defendants or renew a public unsealed motion limited to one for early discovery to determine defendants' addresses so plaintiff can serve defendants with a summons and complaint. But if plaintiff insists on pursuing all defendants listed in its Schedule A in this case, no injunctive relief will issue without notice to defendants and unsealing filings. Notices mailed. |