Guangdong Aoyun Technology Co Ltd. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER Signed by the Honorable Georgia N Alexakis on 12/12/24.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Georgia N Alexakis: Motion hearing held on 12/12/24. No defendant was present. For the reasons stated on the record and reflected in plaintiff's motion, plaintiff's motion for entry of a preliminary injunction 33 is granted. Enter preliminary injunction order. The preliminary injunction directs, among other things, that Schedule A be unsealed. Plaintiff is ordered to enter in CM/ECF no later than 12/16/24 each defendant named in the amended Schedule A as a party in this case (where a defendant has been dismissed, the CM/ECF entry should reflect that status). Failure to timely comply with this requirement may result in vacating the preliminary injunction. For instructions as to how to add parties to the case docket, see https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Videos.aspx?folder=_cmecf&play=Add_Terminate.mp4. Plaintiff is directed to submit a status report on or before 1/13/25 proposing next steps in this matter. If a defendant has entered an appearance by that time, the status report should be jointly prepared by the parties.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Georgia N Alexakis: For the reasons set forth in plaintiff's ex parte motion to extend the temporary restraining order and the accompanying memorandum of law, the Court finds that good cause exists to extend the temporary restraining order in this matter until 12/13/24 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(2). The Court therefore grants plaintiff's motion 23. No appearance is required on 12/9/24.

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Signed by the Honorable Georgia N Alexakis on 11/22/24.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Georgia N Alexakis: Plaintiff's motion to seal 17 and ex parte amended motion for a temporary restraining order against certain defendants 18 are granted. No appearance is necessary on 11/25/24. Plaintiff's written submissions establish that if the specified defendants were informed of this proceeding before a TRO could issue, assets would likely be redirected, defeating plaintiff's interests in identifying defendants, stopping the infringement, and obtaining an accounting. In addition, the submitted evidence establishes a likelihood of success on the merits, the harm to plaintiff is irreparable, and an injunction is in the public interest because infringement interferes with the plaintiff's ability to control its intellectual property. Those rights cannot be fully compensated by money damages. There is no countervailing harm to the specified defendants from an order directing them to stop infringement. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and implement the asset freeze. If any defendant were to appear and object, the Court will take a fresh look at issues related to the asset freeze, joinder, and personal jurisdiction. The Court finds that security in the amount of $1,000 per specified defendant (for a total of $11,000) is sufficient to secure the injunctive relief. Enter Sealed Temporary Restraining Order.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Georgia N Alexakis: Motion hearing held on 11/19/24. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal [6] and motion for electronic service of process [11] are granted. For the reasons set forth on the record, plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order [7] is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff may file an amended motion for a temporary restraining order that addresses the Court's overbreadth and jurisdictional concerns, and that motion should be noticed up for presentment consistent with the Court's standing orders.