Chanel, Inc. v. The Individuals, Business Entities, and Unincorporated Associations

PAPERLESS ORDER ON DEFAULT PROCEDURE. On February 2, 2025, a clerk's default was entered against Defendants. (ECF No. [39]). On February 14, 2025, Plaintiff filed its Motion for Final Default Judgment in accordance with this Court's Paperless Notice of Court Practice Upon Entry of Default. (ECF No. [40]). This case is CLOSED for administrative purposes. The Court shall render an Order on Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment [41] in due course. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 2/14/2025.

Plaintiff's MOTION for Default Judgment Against Defendants and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof by Chanel, Inc.

PAPERLESS NOTICE OF COURT PRACTICE UPON ENTRY OF DEFAULT. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Clerk of Court's Entry of Default as to Defendants masstone.shop and smolus.com. 39. Plaintiff is instructed to file a Motion for Default Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b) within twenty (20) days of the date of this Notice, or the Court will be divested of jurisdiction to enforce any judgment against Defendants. Plaintiff's Motion should include what Counts from the Complaint that Plaintiff alleges against the defaulting Defendants, and affidavits detailing corresponding damages. "Damages may be awarded only if the record adequately reflects the basis for award via. 'a demonstration by detailed affidavits establishing the necessary facts.'" Adolph Coors Co. v. Movement against Racism & Klan, 777 F.2d 1538, 1544 (11th Cir. 1985) (quoting United Artists Corp. v. Freeman, 605 F.2d 854, 857 (5th Cir. 1979)). Plaintiff must also submit appropriate proposed orders so as to conform its submission to the Southern District of Florida Local Rules. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 2/7/2025.

Clerk's Entry of Default as to The Individuals, Business Entities, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A" - Motions Terminated: 38 Motion for Clerks Entry of Default, Signed by DEPUTY CLERK on 2/7/2025.

Plaintiff's MOTION for Clerk's Entry of Default as to The Individuals, Business Entities, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A", masstone.shop, smolus.com by Chanel, Inc.

PAPERLESS ORDER ADOPTING 32 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff Chanel, Inc.'s Motion for Preliminary Injunction. 12. The Court referred the matter to the Honorable Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein, United States Magistrate Judge, to take all necessary and proper action as required by law with respect to Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction. 17 at 11. On January 17, 2025, Magistrate Judge Elfenbein held an evidentiary hearing that was attended only by counsel for Plaintiff, despite Defendants receiving notice of the hearing. See 28 ; 29 ; 31. The same day, Magistrate Judge Elfenbein issued a Report and Recommendation, 32, recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, 12, be granted. See 32 at 9. No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed and the time to do so has passed. The matter is now ripe for review. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Here, Defendants did not appear despite receiving notice of the preliminary injunction hearing. See 28 ; 29 ; 31. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Elfenbein found that (1) Plaintiff has demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, (2) Plaintiff is likely to suffer immediate and irreparable injury in the absence of a preliminary injunction, (3) the threatened injury to Plaintiff outweighs the potential harm to Defendants, and (4) the public interest would be served by the entry of a preliminary injunction. See generally 32. Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Elfenbein recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction 12 be granted and that a preliminary injunction be entered in the form set forth in the Report and Recommendation. Id. at 9-13. This Court agrees. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the Report and Recommendation, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Magistrate Judge Elfenbein's Report and Recommendation 32 is ADOPTED and Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction 12 is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the recommended preliminary injunction set forth in the Report and Recommendation, 32 at 9-13, is INCORPORATED as if fully set forth herein, and ENTERED in favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendants, which are Individuals, Business Entities, and Unincorporated Associations identified on Schedule "A" attached to the Report and Recommendation, to remain in effect during the pendency of this action. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 2/5/2025. (gbn) Modified to Unseal on 2/5/2025

Order

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Chanel, Inc. re [32] REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re [12] Plaintiff's EX PARTE MOTION for Entry of Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Order Restraining Transfer of Assets and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof filed by Chanel, Inc. R upon Defendants via website posting

Plaintiff's NOTICE upon Defendants via Electronic Mail by Chanel, Inc. re [32] REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re [12] Plaintiff's EX PARTE MOTION for Entry of Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Order Restraining Transfer of Assets and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof filed by Chanel, Inc. R

PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion to Extend Temporary Restraining Order. 33. On January 9, 2025, the Court entered an Order granting Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for Entry of Temporary Restraining Order 17 and referred Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction to United States Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein. See 17 at 13. On January 17, 2025, Magistrate Judge Elfenbein issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Entry for Preliminary Injunction be granted. 32. Pursuant to the terms of the R&R, the parties have fourteen (14) days from the date of service within which to file any written objections to the R&R. Id. at 13. The objection period will thus end on January 31, 2025. Therefore, the Court finds good cause to extend the TRO for a like period. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2). UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion 33 is GRANTED. The Temporary Restraining Order 17 entered by this Court on January 9, 2025, is hereby extended, and shall remain in effect until February 1, 2025. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 1/21/2025.

Plaintiff's MOTION to Extend Temporary Restraining Order re [17] Order on Ex Parte Motion, by Chanel, Inc.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re [12] Plaintiff's EX PARTE MOTION for Entry of Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Order Restraining Transfer of Assets and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof filed by Chanel, Inc. Recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. [12], be GRANTED. Objections to R&R due by 1/31/2025 Signed by Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein on 1/17/2025. See attached document for full details.

PAPERLESS Minute Order for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein: Hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction held on 1/17/2025 via Zoom re ECF No. 12. The Court heard from Plaintiff; reasons stated on the record. None of the Defendants appeared for the hearing. The Court noted that none of the Defendants filed a response to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction as required by the Court's Order. The Court will take the matter under advisement. Report and Recommendation to follow. Total time in court: 10 minutes. Attorney Appearance(s): T. Raquel Wiborg-Rodriguez (counsel for the Plaintiff) (Digital 11:14:53; MFE_01_01-17-2025) (ogn1)

SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on [1] Complaint, [21] Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Chanel, Inc. masstone.shop served on 1/15/2025, response/answer due 2/5/2025; smolus.com served on 1/15/2025, response/answer due 2/5/2025.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Chanel, Inc. re [25] Notice of Filing Proposed Summons(es), [6] Pretrial Order, [7] Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge, [9] Order, [13] Plaintiff's EX PARTE MOTION for Order Authorizing Alternate Service of Process on Defendants Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3) and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof, [4] Certificate of Other Affiliates/Corporate Disclosure Statement, [19] Plaintiff's MOTION to Unseal Document Docket Entries 11-13 and 16-18, [18] Sealed Order, Set/Reset Sealed Motion/R&R Deadlines and Hearings, [22] Notice of Conventional Filing, [1] Complaint, [15] Response to Order to Show Cause, [11] Sealed Document, [21] Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal, [10] Order on Motion to Seal, [3] Form AO 120/121, [14] Order to Show Cause, [8] Order, [23] Order on Motion to Unseal Document, [20] Notice of Filing Proposed Summons(es), [17] Order on Ex Parte Motion, [24] Clerk's Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case, Summons(es), [5] Plaintiff's MOTION to Seal per Local Rule 5.4, [12] Plaintiff's EX PARTE MOTION for Entry of Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Order Restraining Transfer of Assets and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof, [16] Order on Ex Parte Motion, [2] Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment, upon Defendants via website posting

Plaintiff's NOTICE upon Defendants via Electronic Mail by Chanel, Inc. re [6] Pretrial Order, [19] Plaintiff's MOTION to Unseal Document Docket Entries 11-13 and 16-18, [18] Sealed Order, Set/Reset Sealed Motion/R&R Deadlines and Hearings, [1] Complaint, [21] Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal, [17] Order on Ex Parte Motion, [12] Plaintiff's EX PARTE MOTION for Entry of Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Order Restraining Transfer of Assets and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof

Summons Issued as to The Individuals, Business Entities, and Unincorporated Associations.

NOTICE of Compliance re 23 Order on Motion to Unseal Document. (All docket entries Unsealed)

NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) by Chanel, Inc.

Clerk's Notice to Filer re: Summons(es) will not be issued. Multiple parties cannot be listed on a single summons. One summons is required for each party. Filer may file a Notice of Filing Proposed Summons(es) with the corrected summons attached. File a separate summons for masstone.shop and one for "The Individuals, Business Entities and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A".

PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion to Unseal. 19. Therein, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter an order "unsealing all documents filed with the Court that have been restricted/ sealed from the Court docket and returning all portions of the Court file to public records." Id. at 1. UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion 19 is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is INSTRUCTED to UNSEAL all docket entries in this case. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 1/14/2025.

Plaintiff's NOTICE of Filing Bond by Chanel, Inc.

AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against All Defendants, filed by Chanel, Inc.

NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) by Chanel, Inc.

Plaintiff's MOTION to Unseal Document Docket Entries 11-13 and 16-18 by Chanel, Inc. Responses due by 1/27/2025.

Order

RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re [14] Order to Show Cause, by Chanel, Inc.

PAPERLESS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. Plaintiff filed its Complaint 1 alleging (1) trademark counterfeiting and infringement; (2) false designation of origin; (3) common law unfair competition; and (4) common law trademark infringement pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1116, and 1125(a), The All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), and Florida's common law, against a list of two (2) Defendants in Schedule A. See generally 1 ; 11. The Complaint does not allege or seek certification of a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Trademark infringement actions such as this have become increasingly prevalent in the Southern District of Florida in recent years, and have routinely been allowed to proceed without careful and independent judicial scrutiny as to whether Plaintiff has properly joined Defendants. Accordingly, the court sua sponte addresses the issue of whether joinder of these Defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 is proper, and also questions as a practical matter whether Plaintiff should be permitted to skirt paying the filing fee for each individual Defendant. See, e.g., Estee Lauder Cosms. Ltd. v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182, 186 (N.D. Ill. 2020) ("[I]t is appropriate for federal courts to raise improper joinder on their own, especially when the sheer number of defendants waves a joinder red flag and ups the chances that the plaintiff should be paying separate filing fees for separate cases."). "On motion or on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party. The court may also sever any claim against a party." Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. As it pertains to joinder of Defendants, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2) provides, in relevant part: "Persons--as well as a vessel, cargo, or other property subject to admiralty process in rem--may be joined in one action as defendants if: (A) any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and (B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action." Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2) (emphasis added). "The district court has broad discretion to join parties or not and that decision will not be overturned as long as it falls within the district court's range of choices." Swan v. Ray, 293 F.3d 1252, 1253 (11th Cir. 2002). Here, while there may well be common questions of law and fact as to the Defendants, it is not at all clear from the Complaint how the two Defendants' alleged infringement "aris[e] out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2)(A). It is also not clear that any relief sought against Defendants is joint and several. The Court points Plaintiff to its prior Order in Liberty Media Holdings, LLC v. BitTorrent Swarm, 277 F.R.D. 672 (S.D. Fla. 2011), as well as the Northern District of Illinois' memorandum opinion and order in Estee Lauder Cosms. Ltd. v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182 (N.D. Ill. 2020), which, while not binding on this Court, is particularly persuasive. Notably, in Liberty Media Holdings, LLC the Court severed and dismissed seventeen (17) defendants as improperly joined. The Estee Lauder court addressed the improper joinder of seventy-nine (79) defendants. Again, the instant action alleges trademark infringement against two (2) Defendants. See also Taylor et al v. The Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations identified on Schedule A, No. 0:22-cv-61279-KMM (S.D. Fla. July 27, 2022) (asserting trademark infringement action against 859 defendants). Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before December 30, 2024 as to why the Court should not sever and dismiss without prejudice the two Defendants in Schedule A following the first named Defendant and require the refiling of separate actions and payment of separate filing fees as those Defendants. Failure to comply with this Order may result in sanctions. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 12/23/2024.

Set Deadlines: Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before December 30, 2024 as to why the Court should not sever and dismiss without prejudice the two Defendants in Schedule A following the first named Defendant and require the refiling of separate actions and payment of separate filing fees as those Defendants per DE [14].

Set Deadlines: Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before December 30, 2024 as to why the Court should not sever and dismiss without prejudice the two Defendants in Schedule A following the first named Defendant and require the refiling of separate actions and payment of separate filing fees as those Defendants per DE [14].

ORDER granting [5] Motion to Seal. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 12/19/2024. See attached document for full details.

ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY PROCEDURES. Signed by Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein on 12/19/2024. See attached document for full details.

ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY PROCEDURES Signed by Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein on 12/19/2024. See attached document for full details.

PAPERLESS ORDER REFERRING PRETRIAL DISCOVERY MATTERS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTY FULGUEIRA ELFENBEIN. PURSUANT to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Magistrate Judge Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the above-captioned Cause is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein to take all necessary and proper action as required by law with respect to any and all pretrial discovery matters. Any motion affecting deadlines set by the Court's Scheduling Order is excluded from this referral, unless specifically referred by separate Order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall comply with Magistrate Judge Elfenbein's discovery procedures. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 12/19/2024.

PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER. This order has been entered upon the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel is hereby ORDERED to forward to all defendants, upon receipt of a responsive pleading, a copy of this Order. It is further ORDERED that S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1 shall apply to this case and the parties shall hold a scheduling conference no later than twenty (20) days after the filing of the first responsive pleading by the last responding defendant, or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the complaint, whichever occurs first. However, if all defendants have not been served by the expiration of this deadline, Plaintiff shall move for an enlargement of time to hold the scheduling conference, not to exceed 90 days from the filing of the Complaint. Within ten (10) days of the scheduling conference, counsel shall file a joint scheduling report. Failure of counsel to file a joint scheduling report within the deadlines set forth above may result in dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorney's fees and costs. The parties should note that the time period for filing a joint scheduling report is not tolled by the filing of any other pleading, such as an amended complaint or Rule 12 motion. The scheduling conference may be held via telephone. At the conference, the parties shall comply with the following agenda that the Court adopts from S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1: (1) Documents (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.1 and 2) - The parties shall determine the procedure for exchanging a copy of, or a description by category and location of, all documents and other evidence that is reasonably available and that a party expects to offer or may offer if the need arises. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(B). (a) Documents include computations of the nature and extent of any category of damages claimed by the disclosing party unless the computations are privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(C). (b) Documents include insurance agreements which may be at issue with the satisfaction of the judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(D). (2) List of Witnesses - The parties shall exchange the name, address and telephone number of each individual known to have knowledge of the facts supporting the material allegations of the pleading filed by the party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(A). The parties have a continuing obligation to disclose this information. (3) Discussions and Deadlines (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.2) - The parties shall discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case. Failure to comply with this Order or to exchange the information listed above may result in sanctions and/or the exclusion of documents or witnesses at the time of trial. S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.I. The parties are hereby on notice that this Court requires all filings to be formatted in 12 point Times New Roman font and double spaced, including any footnotes, with one inch margins on all sides. Failure to follow these formatting guidelines may result in the filing being stricken, any opposing filing being granted by default, and the imposition of other sanctions, including attorney's fees and costs. Multiple Plaintiffs or Defendants shall file joint motions with co-parties unless there are clear conflicts of position. If conflicts of position exist, parties shall explain the conflicts in their separate motions. Failure to comply with ANY of these procedures may result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions, including but not limited to, the striking of the motion or dismissal of this action. The parties shall seek extensions of time in a timely fashion. "A motion for extension of time is not self-executing. Yet, by filing these motions on or near the last day, and then sitting idle pending the Court's disposition of the motion, parties essentially grant their own motion. The Court will not condone this." Compere v. Nusret Miami, LLC, 2020 WL 2844888, at *2 (S.D. Fla. May 7, 2020) (internal citations omitted). Pursuant to Administrative Order 2016-70 of the Southern District of Florida and consistent with the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit's Local Rules and Internal Operating Procedures, within three (3) days of the conclusion of a trial or other proceeding, parties must file via CM/ECF electronic versions of documentary exhibits admitted into evidence, including photographs of non-documentary physical exhibits. The Parties are directed to comply with each of the requirements set forth in Administrative Order 2016-70 unless directed otherwise by the Court. Telephonic appearances are not permitted for any purpose. Upon reaching a settlement in this matter the parties are instructed to notify the Court by telephone and to file a Notice of Settlement within twenty-four (24) hours. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 12/19/2024.

Order

Plaintiff's MOTION to Seal per Local Rule 5.4 by Chanel, Inc.

Plaintiff's Corporate Disclosure Statement by Chanel, Inc.

FORM AO 120 SENT TO DIRECTOR OF U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK

Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge K. Michael Moore. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against All Defendants. Filing fees $ 405.00 receipt number AFLSDC-18062375, filed by Chanel, Inc.