ORDER denying 41 Motion for Reconsideration. At 11:18 a.m. on June 3, 2026, this Court denied Plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction because of Plaintiff's "unjustified delay" of over seven months in moving for such relief , which "undercut[] the sense of urgency that ordinarily accompanies" such a motion. Dkt. 37 at 2-3 (internal quotation marks omitted). At 1:08 p.m. that same day, Plaintiff filed a motion to reconsider that denial, purportedly because t he Court "overlooked" that the certified Copyright Office materials on which Plaintiff partly relied were issued on May 7, 2026, and "[t]he timing of the preliminary-injunction motion should therefore be evaluated in light of that ce rtification process." Dkt. 41-1 at 5. The Court overlooked nothing. As Plaintiff acknowledges, it "initiated the Copyright Office certification process on March 2, 2026," id. at 1-2, which was the day before Plaintiff filed an Amende d Complaint it had to be given a deadline to file despite Plaintiff being granted leave to file an Amended Complaint on January 21, 2026, and "two more months had passed between the request to file an Amended Complaint and this Court denying th e initial motion for a temporary restraining order and instructing Plaintiff to supplement the record in an Amended Complaint, Dkt. 37 at 1-3 (recounting "the plodding procedural history leading to the pending preliminary-injunction motion&quo t;). Such an unexplained delay alone would be grounds for denying the preliminary-injunction motion. See id. at 2-3. Plaintiff may ultimately receive the relief it seeks at the conclusion of the proceedings, but its "[l]ack of diligence, stand ing alone," belies any assertion of "irreparable harm pending trial" and thus "preclude[s] the granting of preliminary injunctive relief." Majorica, S.A. v. R.H. Macy & Co., 762 F.2d 7, 8 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks omitted). Plaintiff's reconsideration motion is thus denied. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Docket Number 41. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 6/4/2026) (rro)
原告提交TRO申请 查看公开文件 ↗Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd. v. Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
案件进展
43 条记录Reconsideration
Summons Issued
Summons Issued
Summons Issued
OPINION AND ORDER re: 36 FIRST MOTION for Preliminary Injunction . filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd., 33 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction . MOTION to Dismiss for Insufficient Service and Fail ure to State a Claim. filed by ShenZhen Qianhai Venture Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Florence Beauty Cosmetics Co., Ltd., Shaanxi Rongde Aerospace Tech Development Co., Ltd. For the above reasons, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion for a pr eliminary injunction and Defendants motion to dismiss. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Docket Numbers 33 and 36. In the event the Clerk's Office has not yet issued the requested summonses in this case, it is respectfully directed to do so. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 6/3/2026) (jca) Transmission to Office of the Clerk of Court for processing.
原告提交PI申请 查看公开文件 ↗ADD PARTY FOR PLEADING. Defendants/Respondents ShenZhen Qianhai Venture Co., Ltd., Shaanxi Rongde Aerospace Tech Development Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Florence Beauty Cosmetics Co., Ltd. added. Party added pursuant to 6 Complaint, 5 Complaint.Document filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd.. Related document: 6 Complaint, 5 Complaint..(Kaushik, Nitin)
Preliminary Injunction
Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion
Response to Motion
Dismiss AND Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction
ORDER: On April 7, 2026, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. ECF No. 31. To date, Defendants have not responded within the time provided by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3). Defendants shall respond to the Amended Complaint by June 5, 2026. If Defendants do not respond by that date, Plaintiff shall file a letter by June 8, 2026, indicating whether it intends to move for default judgment. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 5/28/2026) (dsh)
法院作出缺席判决 查看公开文件 ↗Amended Complaint
Amended Complaint
Amended Complaint
Amended Complaint
ORDER: On January 20, 2026, Plaintiff indicated that it intends to file an amended complaint as of right pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1). Plaintiff is directed to file the amended complaint by March 3, 2026, or, in the alternative, file a letter explaining why it is unable to do so. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 2/17/2026) (dsh)
查看公开文件 ↗Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion
Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge
Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice
Appear Pro Hac Vice
Order on Motion for Leave to File Document
Leave to File Document
Order on Motion to Serve
RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re: 13 Order to Show Cause,,,,. Document filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd.. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Model Certification for AI Filings).(Kaushik, Nitin) (Entered: 01/03/2026)
ORDER with respect to 9 Motion to Serve. Given the above irregularities, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause by January 5, 2026, as to the following: (1) how Schedule A of the Complaint, which lists physical addresses, is consistent with Plaintiff's representation that no reliable physical addresses have been identified; (2) precisely how Plaintiff has been reasonably diligent in searching for Defendants' physical addresses, including how Plaintiff found the addresses listed in Schedule A of the Complaint; and (3) how Plaintiff found the three post-Moonbug cases cited at Paragraph 16 of the Response and what steps, if any, it took to verify the accuracy of those citations. Plaintiff's counsel is reminded of his obligations under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 12/19/2025) (cji) (Entered: 12/19/2025)
RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re: 13 Order to Show Cause,,,,. Document filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd...(Kaushik, Nitin) (Entered: 12/05/2025)
REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Shenzhen Florence Beauty Cosmetics Co., Ltd., re: 6 Complaint, 5 Complaint. Document filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd...(Kaushik, Nitin) (Entered: 11/25/2025)
REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Shaanxi Rongde Aerospace Tech Development Co., Ltd, re: 6 Complaint, 5 Complaint. Document filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd...(Kaushik, Nitin) (Entered: 11/25/2025)
REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to ShenZhen Qianhai Venture Co., Ltd., re: 6 Complaint, 5 Complaint. Document filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd...(Kaushik, Nitin) (Entered: 11/25/2025)
ORDER: To date, Plaintiff has neither requested that the Clerk of Court issue summonses for each Defendant nor served any of the Defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (requiring service of process within ninety days of the complaint's filing). Instead, Plaintiff requests that the Court allow "service of process on Defendants via email and electronic publication pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f) (3)." Dkt. 9 at 4. Plaintiff shall request the issuance of summonses from the Clerk of Court by November 25, 2025. Plaintiff shall further show cause by December 5, 2025, why its request for alternative service is proper in light of caselaw suggesting that it "is now well-established in this district that service by email on defendants located in China is not permitted by the Hague Convention." Moonbug Entm't Ltd. v. ABDG Store, No. 22 Civ. 2386 (RA), 2025 WL 1796242, at *2-4 (S.D.N.Y. June 30, 2025) (internal quotation marks omitted). (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 11/20/2025) (jca) (Entered: 11/20/2025)
RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re: 11 Order to Show Cause. Document filed by Shenzhen Yilaima Technology Co. Ltd. (jca) (Entered: 11/18/2025)
SEALED ORDER: In addition, on October 15, 2025, the Honorable Jennifer L. Rochon issued an order authorizing the sealing of this action, "without prejudice to reconsideration by the judge ultimately assigned to this case." By November 7, 2025, Plaintiff must show cause why continued sealing is warranted under the applicable standards in this Circuit. Failure to do so will result in the Court unsealing this action in its entirety without further notice. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 11/4/2025) (jca) (Entered: 11/18/2025)
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF's EX PARTE MOTION FOR ENTRY OF A SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER INCLUDING A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION, A TEMPORARY ASSET RESTRAINT AND EXPEDITED DISCOVERY: ***Previously filed under seal in envelope #2 and unsealed by docket entry 3***. (js) (Entered: 11/18/2025)
原告提交TRO申请MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE ELECTRONICALLY PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 4(f)(3): ***Previously filed under seal in envelope #2 and unsealed by docket entry 3 ***.(js) (Entered: 11/18/2025)
PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTION FOR ENTRY OF A SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER INCLUDING A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION, A TEMPORARY ASSET RESTRAINT, AND EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ***Previously filed under seal in envelope #2 and unsealed by docket entry 3***..(js) (Entered: 11/18/2025)
原告提交TRO申请ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SEAL: *This order is without prejudice to reconsideration by the judge ultimately assigned to this case. Plaintiff shall proceed in accordance with the instructions set forth in ECF Rules 6.14 and 14.2. T he Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to file this Order under seal and restrict the viewing to only the attorney appearing for the filing party and court personnel. and to terminate this miscellaneous case. ***Previously filed under seal in envelope #2 and unsealed by docket entry 3***. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 10/15/2025) (js)
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT: ***Previously filed under seal in envelope #2 and unsealed by docket entry 3***.(js) (Entered: 11/17/2025)
VERIFICATION OF THE COMPLAINT: ***Previously filed under seal in envelope #2 and unsealed by docket entry 3***.(js) (Main Document 5 replaced on 11/17/2025) (js). (Entered: 11/17/2025)
CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. ***Previously filed under seal in envelope #2 and unsealed by docket entry 3 ***.(js) (Entered: 11/17/2025)
ORDER: The Court declines Plaintiff's suggestion to read the letters chart as part of its Complaint. Should Plaintiff wish for that chart to be considered, it should amend the Complaint and attach the chart as an exhibit or include it within the Complaint's allegations. The Court further notes that Plaintiff's ability to show a likelihood of success on the merits depends on Plaintiff providing sufficiently clear and legible evidence establishing Defendants' infringement . Finally, because Plaintiff has failed to adequately show cause why continued sealing is warranted under the applicable standards in this Circuit after being warned that failing to do so would result in the Court unsealing this action in its entirety without further notice, November 4, 2025 Order at 2, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to unseal this action in its entirety, including this Order. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 11/12/2025) (js)
查看公开文件 ↗SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault..(jus) (Entered: 11/13/2025)
***Sealed*** ORDER, Case sealed. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 10/15/2025) (jus) (Entered: 11/13/2025)
