Levi Strauss & Co. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Levi Strauss & Co. as to DT SHANGMAOD YYT on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; HJWEN FitHaven YYT on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; HUANG JW YYT on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; JoyWearzhou YYT on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; LY GO SHOP YYT on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; Summit Garments Trendy clothing on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; Vanguard Mode on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; XL SMD YYT on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; YOURUIFAFA on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026; YUanfengddd on 10/2/2026, answer due 10/23/2026.

ORDER Authorizing Electronic Service of Process signed by the Honorable Charles P. Kocoras on 9/30/2026. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Charles P. Kocoras: Plaintiff's renewed motion for electronic service of process 62 is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is granted as to Defendants 32 through 40, for whom the platform supplied no address beyond "China"; on this record those addresses are not known within the meaning of Article 1 of the Hague Convention. The motion is also granted as to Defendant 29. The motion is otherwise denied without prejudice. Plaintiff's investigation consisted solely of database searches: Baidu Maps, Qichacha, and the National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System. See Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc., No. 26 C 6700, Dkt. # 64, at 2 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 8, 2026) (Alonso, J.) ("This information does not convince the Court that if someone knocks at the door at the addresses Plaintiff received from the third-party platform or platforms in this case, they will not find any representatives of Defendants there."). Plaintiff's own Exhibit 1 [65-1] shows that for most Defendants with complete addresses (18 of 21) the Qichacha search located a registered business whose name and address match (at least in part) the platform-provided address. Corroborated address information of that kind is a lead that must be pursued. Defendant 22 illustrates the point: the platform-provided address and the registered address returned by Qichacha are different locations, so the searches produced two identifiable addresses for that Defendant, and neither has been investigated further. That a Baidu Maps search results list does not include a defendant's Seller Alias or business entity name is not conclusive evidence that the defendant is not at the searched address. See Reebok Int'l Ltd., 26 C 10969, Dkt. # 19 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 14, 2026) (Durkin, J.) ("the results of searches using online mapping services (e.g., Google Maps, Baidu Maps, etc.) are insufficient to establish that an address 'is not known' for purposes of jurisdiction under the Hague Convention."); Chrome Hearts LLC, 26 C 7163, at Dkt. # 45 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 18, 2026) (Rowland, J.) ("plugging in a candidate address into Baidu Maps and observing if the search results listed the corresponding Defendant's Seller Alias or business entity name. assumes that each Defendant listed its seller / business name on Baidu Maps."). Additionally, a recent deregistration does not mean that the defendant's address is unknown; the deregistration of Defendants 13, 23, 43, and 68 establishes that their corporate registrations ended, not that the registered premises are unknown. Any renewed motion must be supported by a declaration made under penalty of perjury detailing the specific, reasonably diligent efforts undertaken and the outcome of each effort, as to each Defendant. For any Defendant as to whom the investigation returned an identifiable physical location, including a location associated with a similarly named entity, Plaintiff must explain what steps were taken to rule the address out (for example, by courier or investigator confirmation that the premises do not exist, are incomplete or fictitious, or are occupied by an unrelated party, or by another similarly reliable method). A conclusory statement that "there is nothing showing Defendant is at the provided address" tells the Court nothing. A status report is due 10/19/2026. Plaintiff must submit a proposed order consistent with this ruling by 9/30/2026 to Proposed_Order_Kocoras@ilnd.uscourts.gov. Mailed notice

MOTION by Plaintiff Levi Strauss & Co. for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3) (Renewed)

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Levi Strauss & Co. as to The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A on 4/22/2026, answer due 5/13/2026.

SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendant The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

MOTION by Plaintiff Levi Strauss & Co. for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3)