TRO101 logo TRO101

2024-cv-08964

TV Tokyo Corporation v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A Hereto

法院：伊利诺伊州北法院
发案日期：2024-09-26
原告：TV Tokyo Corporation
代理律所：HSP
诉讼类型：商标、版权
# Date Description
[+] 1 2024-09-26 COMPLAINT filed by TV Tokyo Corporation; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22524251.
2 2024-09-26 CIVIL Cover Sheet
3 2024-09-26 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation by Michael A. Hierl
4 2024-09-26 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation by William Benjamin Kalbac
5 2024-09-26 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation by Robert Payton Mcmurray
6 2024-09-26 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation by John Wilson
7 2024-09-26 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation to seal document Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Under Seal
8 2024-09-26 SCHEDULE A by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Sealed Schedule A Modified on 11/6/2024.
[+] 9 2024-09-26 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by TV Tokyo Corporation
10 2024-09-26 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for leave to file excess pages Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Page Limitation
11 2024-09-26 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for temporary restraining order Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Entry of a Temporary Restraining Order, Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, Expedited Discovery, and Service of Process by Email and/or Electronic Publication
[+] 12 2024-09-26 MEMORANDUM by TV Tokyo Corporation in support of motion for temporary restraining order, 11
13 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 1 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
14 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 2 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
15 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 3 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
16 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 4 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
17 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 5 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
18 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 6 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
19 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 7 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
20 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 8 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
21 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 9 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
22 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 10 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
23 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 11 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
24 2024-09-26 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Exhibit 3 Part 12 of Saiki Declaration
25 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 13 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
26 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 14 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
27 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 15 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
28 2024-09-26 EXHIBIT 3 Part 16 of Saiki Declaration by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Modified on 11/6/2024.
29 2024-09-26 Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by TV Tokyo Corporation
30 2024-09-26 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Plaintiff should review the Court's standing order on "Schedule A" Cases, available at https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/judge-info.aspx?IuUaWzNcEoPr4PHl9tvcGaMUezk8AnJ1 under the "Case Procedures" tab. As explained there, Plaintiff must complete and file the template linked on that page before the Court will consider granting any motion for preliminary injunctive relief. If the template is not completed by October 10, 2024, the Court may dismiss this matter for failure to prosecute. Mailed notice.
31 2024-10-03 Schedule A Supplement by TV Tokyo Corporation
32 2024-10-03 SEALED ORDER Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 10/3/2024. Mailed notice.
33 2024-10-03 TEMPORARY Restraining Order. Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 10/3/2024. Mailed notice. Modified on 11/6/2024.
34 2024-10-10 SURETY BOND in the amount of $ 10,000.00 posted by TV Tokyo Corporation. (Document not scanned.)
35 2024-10-14 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for extension of time Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion to Extend the Temporary Restraining Order
[+] 36 2024-10-15 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Plaintiffs motion to extend the TRO 35 is granted. The TRO is extended to October 31, 2024. Mailed notice.
37 2024-10-28 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for preliminary injunction Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of a Preliminary Injunction
38 2024-10-28 MEMORANDUM by TV Tokyo Corporation in support of motion for preliminary injunction 37
39 2024-10-28 DECLARATION of Michael A. Hierl regarding motion for preliminary injunction 37
40 2024-10-28 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion 37 for entry of a preliminary injunction. In connection with that motion, Plaintiff must serve all remaining Defendants with the following statement: "The Court has taken the motion for a preliminary injunction under advisement and will consider the motion unopposed if no Defendant appears and objects by October 31, 2024." If no objections are filed by that date, the Court will consider the motion unopposed. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining Defendants within one business day of its entry on the docket and must promptly file proof of that service. For the reasons stated in the Court's orders entering the TRO, the TRO is extended until the Court adjudicates the motion for a preliminary injunction. See H-D Mich., LLC v. Hellenic Duty Free Shops S.A., 694 F.3d 827, 843-45 (7th Cir. 2012). Because this extension exceeds the maximum duration for a TRO under FRCP 65(b), this extension "becomes in effect a preliminary injunction that is appealable, but the order remains effective." Id. at 844. Mailed notice.
41 2024-10-28 CERTIFICATE of Service by John Wilson on behalf of TV Tokyo Corporation
42 2024-10-29 SUMMONS Returned Executed by TV Tokyo Corporation as to The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto on 10/28/2024, answer due 11/18/2024.
43 2024-11-01 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 37 is granted. Plaintiff's filings establish that it has acted expeditiously to protect its interests and that there remains a significant risk Defendants will transfer relevant assets beyond the Court's reach. For these reasons, as well as the reasons provided in the whole of Plaintiff's filings and as stated by the Court in connection with entry of the TRO, the Court is persuaded that Plaintiff has satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction. In addition, the Court finds that the balance of harms favors Plaintiff and that a preliminary injunction serves the public interest by, among other things, protecting consumers from the marketing of counterfeit goods. Plaintiff has also certified and established 41 that it provided electronic notice to defendants of the pendency of this case and provided a link to a website containing relevant case documents, but no objection to the motion for a preliminary injunction has been filed on behalf of any defendant. Enter preliminary injunction order. The Clerk shall unseal any documents that are sealed. The Law Firm of Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd., is ordered to add ALL defendant names listed in the Schedule A to the docket within five business days, instructions can be found on the Court's website at https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/_forms/_cmecf/pdfs/v60/Add_Terminate_Instructions.pdf. Mailed notice.
[+] 44 2024-11-01 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Order Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 11/1/2024. Mailed notice.
45 2024-11-12 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Certain Defendants
46 2024-11-12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: By November 18, 2024, Plaintiff shall file a status report regarding next steps in this case. If Plaintiff intends to file a motion for default judgment, it should be filed by that date, and if Plaintiff moves for default judgment as to all Defendants, no status report need be filed. Mailed notice.
47 2024-11-15 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. by Adam Edward Urbanczyk
48 2024-11-17 MOTION by Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. for extension of time
49 2024-11-18 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Over the objection, Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd's motion for an extension of time [48] is granted. This Defendant's responsive pleading is now due by December 9, 2024. Mailed notice.
50 2024-11-18 STATUS Report by TV Tokyo Corporation
51 2024-11-18 MOTION for an extension of time to answer or otherwise plead filed by Defendant, No. 224, Suave Lobodzinski (pro se). (Received via pro se email on 11/18/2024)
52 2024-11-18 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Certain Defendants
53 2024-11-19 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendant No. 224 Yiwu Wenzan CO., Ltd.'s motion for an extension of time [51] is granted. This Defendant's deadline to answer the complaint is extended to December 9, 2024. Mailed notice.
54 2024-11-19 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: A further status report as to the remaining Defendants (other than Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. who is represented by counsel) is due by December 11, 2024, unless a motion for default judgment is filed sooner. Mailed notice.
55 2024-11-21 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Defendant No. 54
56 2024-11-26 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Certain Defendants
58 2024-12-03 OPPOSED MOTION to Dismiss or, alternatively, to sever filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se email on 12/3/2024)
59 2024-12-03 DECLARATION OF JING ZHU. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se email on 12/3/2024)
57 2024-12-04 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Defendant No. 42
60 2024-12-06 DECLARATION OF JING ZHU. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se email on 12/6/2024)
61 2024-12-06 OPPOSED MOTION to Dismiss or, alternatively, to sever filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se email on 12/6/2024)
62 2024-12-06 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: A person named "S. Suave Lobodzinski" acting on behalf of Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd has filed amotion to dismiss or to sever [58] but the motion is denied without prejudice to refiling. The Court does not know whether Lobodzinski is a licensed attorney, but a pro se litigant may only represent himself in federal court, not another person or entity. A search of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission website shows that Lobodzinski is not a licensed attorney in Illinois, nor does he appear to be a member of the Court's bar, and he did not file an attorney appearance in this case. The Court directs Plaintiff's counsel to confer with Lobodzinski to see if the matter can be resolved, and to file a status report by December 20, 2024. If no agreement can be reached, the Court will permit Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd time to retain US counsel and refile the motion. Mailed notice.
63 2024-12-06 DECLARATION of S. Suave Lobodzinski. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se email on 12/6/224)
64 2024-12-06 DECLARATION of Xin Lan. (Exhibit) (Received via pro se email on 12/6/2024)
65 2024-12-06 CERTIFICATE of Service. (Received via pro se email on 12/6/2024)
[+] 66 2024-12-09 MOTION by Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction
67 2024-12-09 MOTION by Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. for leave to file excess pages UNOPPOSED
68 2024-12-10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Plaintiff's response to the motion to dismiss [66] is due by December 30, 2024 and Defendant's reply is due by January 9, 2025. The motion for excess pages [67] is granted. Mailed notice.
[+] 69 2024-12-11 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for default judgment as to Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default and Default Judgment Against Defendants Identified on Amended Schedule A
[+] 70 2024-12-11 MEMORANDUM by TV Tokyo Corporation in support of motion for default judgment[69]
[+] 71 2024-12-11 DECLARATION of Michael A. Hierl regarding motion for default judgment[69]
72 2024-12-11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion [69] for entry of default and default judgment against all Defendants. All remaining defendants have failed either to plead or to otherwise appear to defend against this action. Accordingly, default is entered under Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Any objections to the motion for entry of default judgment must be filed on or before December 18, 2024. If no objections are filed by that date, the court will consider the motion unopposed. The Court will also rule on the papers unless a hearing is requested by December 16, 2024. A hearing may be requested by filing a Request for Hearing as a separate entry on the docket. Plaintiff must serve this minute order upon all remaining Defendants within one business day of its entry on the docket and must promptly file proof of that service. Mailed notice.
73 2024-12-12 CERTIFICATE of Service by William Benjamin Kalbac on behalf of TV Tokyo Corporation
74 2024-12-13 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Certain Defendants
76 2024-12-13 PRO SE Appearance by Defendant JING ZHU,an Individual doing business as Yiwu Wenzan Apparel CO., Ltd. (Received via pro se email on 12/13/2024)
75 2024-12-16 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Certain Defendants
79 2024-12-18 OPPOSITION to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., LTD's No. 224. (Received via pro se email on 12/18/2024)
80 2024-12-18 CERTIFICATE of Service filed by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., LTD's No. 224, Jing Zhu. (Received via pro se email on 12/18/2024)
77 2024-12-19 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The following order does not apply to Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. No Defendant has responded to Plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment. Accordingly, the motion [69] is granted. Based on the evidence previously submitted by Plaintiff and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, Plaintiff has established that a permanent injunction should be entered. The infringement of Plaintiff's marks irreparably harms Plaintiff and confuses the public. This infringement was willful and statutory damages are awarded. After considering the nature of the products, the price point, the absence of any concrete evidence of lost profits or high-volume infringement by Defendants (Plaintiff has failed to seek an accounting of profits), the value of Plaintiff's brand, and the need to deter infringement that is easily committed and difficult to stop, the court concludes that $75,000 is an appropriate award of statutory damages. Enter Final Partial Judgment Order. Mailed notice.
78 2024-12-19 DEFAULT JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 12/19/2024. Mailed notice.
81 2024-12-20 STATUS Report by TV Tokyo Corporation
82 2024-12-23 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The Order of default is vacated as to Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., LTD only. This Defendant should not have been included in the default judgment materials Plaintiff submitted because the Court directed the parties to meet and confer and provide an update by way of a status report. It is unclear whether the conferral occurred as the Court directed. Lobodzinsk reports that the parties did not confer [79] and Plaintiff's status report states only that the parties were not able to reach an agreement [81]. In light of Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., LTD.'s efforts to appear and respond and the Court's preference to resolve cases on the merits, the Court provides Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., LTD until January 17, 2025 to retain US counsel and file an answer to the complaint, or otherwise resolve the matter with Plaintiff. As previously explained, Lobodzinski is not a licensed attorney, and a pro se litigant may only represent himself in federal court, not another person or entity. If no answer or responsive pleading is filed by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., LTD by that date, Plaintiff may file the appropriate motion. Mailed notice.
83 2024-12-23 STATUS Report filed by Jing Zhu, an individual doing business as Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se email on 12/23/2024)
84 2024-12-27 SATISFACTION of Judgment
86 2024-12-27 ANNUAL REMINDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 (Notification of Affiliates), any nongovernmental party, other than an individual or sole proprietorship, must file a statement identifying all its affiliates known to the party after diligent review or, if the party has identified no affiliates, then a statement reflecting that fact must be filed. An affiliate is defined as follows: any entity or individual owning, directly or indirectly (through ownership of one or more other entities), 5% or more of a party. The statement is to be electronically filed as a PDF in conjunction with entering the affiliates in CM/ECF as prompted. As a reminder to counsel, parties must supplement their statements of affiliates within thirty (30) days of any change in the information previously reported. This minute order is being issued to all counsel of record to remind counsel of their obligation to provide updated information as to additional affiliates if such updating is necessary. If counsel has any questions regarding this process, this LINK will provide additional information. Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 12/27/2024: Mailed notice.
[+] 85 2024-12-30 RESPONSE by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 66]
87 2025-01-08 SATISFACTION of Judgment
88 2025-01-09 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. by Brian Swift
89 2025-01-09 REPLY by Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. to Response[85]
90 2025-01-10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion to dismiss [66] for lack of jurisdiction is denied. Personal jurisdiction may be either general or specific. See Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117, 12628 (2014), and Plaintiff has established a prima facie case of specific personal jurisdiction over Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. Defendant's argument against specific personal jurisdiction is that it did not conduct business in Illinois and did not direct or target their allegedly infringing activities to the Illinois market [Dkts. 66, 89] But the materials included in Plaintiff's response, including a purchase order dated March 2024 using an order number ending in 6462 involved an order for a counterfeit product from Defendant, that listed a Bensenville, Illinois address for shipping that had been placed but was awaiting confirmation. [Dkt. 85-1 at 6.] Even assuming the order was cancelled and never shipped, the Court agrees with other decisions in this district that it cannot allow a defendant to avoid this Court's jurisdiction by apparently cancelling the order after it was placed. RABUS GmbH v. Individuals Identified on Schedule A, 2022 WL 7501046 (N.D. Ill. 2022); Pit Viper, LLC v. The P'Ships, et al., Case No. 23-cv-14761. Here, the order was placed and Defendant assigned it an order number, which is sufficient to make a prima facia showing of purposeful availment at this stage. Defendants were ready, willing, and able to ship products to an Illinois address. NBA Properties, Inc. v. HANWJH, 46 F.4th 614, 624 (7th Cir. 2022) (purposeful direction aimed at Illinois where the defendant established an online storefront, indicated a willingness to sell to Illinois, and fulfilled an order by "intentionally shipping an infringing product to the customer's designated Illinois address.") The remaining requirements for personal jurisdiction are also satisfied because the contact at issue relates to this suit and Defendant has taken steps to make its products, including those at issue in this case, available to Illinois customers. As such, it does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice for Defendant to defend against the claims in this forum. Defendant's answer is due by January 17, 2025. By January 24, 2025, the parties are to jointly propose a fact discovery schedule and if either party wishes to conduct jurisdictional discovery, it should be included in the proposed schedule to occur alongside fact discovery. Mailed notice.
91 2025-01-15 SATISFACTION of Judgment
92 2025-01-17 ANSWER to Complaint by Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd.
93 2025-01-17 ANSWERS to Plaintiff's Complaint by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se email on 1/17/2025)
94 2025-01-17 DECLARATION of Jing Zhu. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se email on 1/17/2025)
95 2025-01-22 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: As to Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd., the Court provided this Defendant until January 17, 2025 to retain US counsel and file an answer to the complaint, or otherwise resolve the matter with Plaintiff. The filings at docket entries 93 and 94 were made by Jing Zhu, who is not a licensed lawyer and therefore he cannot make filings on behalf of Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. The declaration states that Jing Zhu is operator and business owner, but not that he is licensed to represent another entity in this case. The Court provided Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd with more than 3 weeks to either retain counsel who can appear and answer the matter, but that has not occurred, so the filing at 93 is stricken. Plaintiff should file the appropriate motion as to this Defendant by or before February 5, 2025. Mailed notice.
[+] 96 2025-01-23 MOTION by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. to reconsider.
97 2025-01-24 MOTION by Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. to Modify Asset Restraint [Dkt. 44]
98 2025-01-24 by TV Tokyo Corporation Proposed Joint Discovery Schedule
99 2025-01-27 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd's motion to reconsider [96] is granted. Jing Zhu represents that he is the sole proprietor doing business as Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. Mr. Zhu argues that as a sole proprietor, he may appear on Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co.'s behalf. The Seventh Circuit agrees that a sole proprietorship may litigate pro se. United States v. Hagerman, 545 F.3d 579, 581 (7th Cir. 2008) ("A sole proprietorship may litigate pro se. because it has no legal identity separate from the proprietor himself." (citations omitted)); Jeroski v. Fed. Mine Safety & Health Rev. Comm'n, 697 F.3d 651, 652 (7th Cir. 2012) ("A proprietorship is not a legal entity, but merely a name under which the owner, who is the real party in interest, does business."). Thus, Yiwu Wenzan's filing at [93], which the Court treats as a motion to dismiss, shall stand. Plaintiff's response is due by February 10, 2025. Mailed notice.
100 2025-01-27 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: As to the motion to modify the asset restraint on Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. [97], Plaintiff's response to the motion is due by February 24, 2025 and Defendant Quanzhou Haixin's reply is due by March 3, 2025. The Court imposes the following fact discovery schedule as proposed by Plaintiff and Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment: Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures are due by February 28, 2025; written discovery may issue beginning on March 28, 2025; third-party platform discovery may issue by March 28, 2025; all fact discovery including third-party platform discovery must be noticed in time for completion by June 27, 2025. The parties are to file a joint status report by June 6, 2025 that confirms fact discovery will conclude on time and that proposes an expert discovery schedule. Mailed notice.
[+] 101 2025-02-10 RESPONSE by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 93]
102 2025-02-12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd's motion to dismiss [93] is denied, though the filing at docket entry [93] may stand as this Defendant's answer. See attached Order for further details. The Court imposes the same fact discovery schedule on Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd as is in place for the other appearing Defendant in this case. That is, Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures are due by February 28, 2025; written discovery may issue beginning on March 28, 2025; third-party platform discovery may issue by March 28, 2025; all fact discovery including third-party platform discovery must be noticed in time for completion by June 27, 2025. All the parties are to file a joint status report by June 6, 2025 that confirms fact discovery will conclude on time and that proposes an expert discovery schedule. Mailed notice.
103 2025-02-12 ORDER Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 2/12/2025. Mailed notice.
[+] 104 2025-02-24 RESPONSE by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Response to the Motion to Modify the Asset Restraint of Defendant No. 110 "QUANZHOU HAIXIN GARMENT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD." [Dkt. No. 97]
105 2025-02-25 SATISFACTION of Judgment
[+] 106 2025-03-03 REPLY by Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co., Ltd. to Response, [104]
107 2025-03-31 SATISFACTION of Judgment
108 2025-04-01 SATISFACTION of Judgment
109 2025-04-23 SATISFACTION of Judgment
110 2025-04-24 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendant Quanzhou Haixin Garment Technology Co's motion to modify the asset restraint [97] is granted. Defendant argues that $165,720.52 is restrained in its Alibaba seller account "as compared to a total revenue and maximum equitable award of $0 from sales of the allegedly infringing products, which strains equity." Plaintiff responds only by arguing that it would be premature for the Court to reduce the asset restraint before the parties complete discovery. Still, the Court agrees with Defendant that there is at least some indication that the current restraint includes funds that Defendant obtained from the sales of other products unrelated to the alleged infringing sales in this case, and Plaintiff has no interest or claim in those funds. [Dkt. 66-1 at 2.] A reduction of the restraint is appropriate, though the Court declines to eliminate the restrain altogether as Defendant advocates. After all, Plaintiff has responded with an affidavit of its own stating that information regarding the sales of Defendant's infringing products located on Alibaba's platform had not been supplied, so Defendant's assertion that revenue from sales of the allegedly infringing product is $0.00 remains untested, and there has been no accounting. The current restrain is modified to reflect that any funds in excess of $2,500 must be released immediately by Alibaba. Mailed notice
111 2025-05-08 STIPULATION of Dismissal Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal
112 2025-05-12 MOTION to Modify Asset Restraint filed by defendant Jing Zhu, Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se email on 5/12/2025)
113 2025-05-12 DECLARATION of Jing Zhu. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se email on 5/12/2025)
114 2025-05-13 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The Court declines to provide the length of time requested by the parties to resolve the straightforward question of an asset restraint. Plaintiff's response to the motion to modify the asset restraint is due by May 23, 2025. Any reply is due by May 30, 2025. Mailed notice.
[+] 115 2025-05-23 RESPONSE by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation Plaintiff's Response to the Motion to Modify the Asset Restraint of Defendant No. 224 "YIWU WENZAN APPAREL CO., LTD." [Dkt. No. 112]
116 2025-05-24 DECLARATION of Jing Zhu of Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se online portal on 5/24/2025)
117 2025-05-24 REPLY to Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Modify Asset Restraint filed by Defendant Jing Zhu for Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 5/24/2025)
118 2025-05-27 EXHIBITS filed by Jing Zhu of Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 5/27/2025)
119 2025-05-29 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendant Jing Zhu, Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd's motion to modify the asset restraint [112] is granted. Defendant argues that the nearly $460,000 currently restrained in its Alibaba account should be limited to that which Plaintiff is reasonably likely to recover pursuant to an equitable accounting of profits in this case. 17 U.S.C. § 504(a). According to this Defendant, there has been $0 in revenue from sales of the allegedly infringing products. Plaintiff responds that Defendant's actual sales remain disputed since no discovery has taken place, and even if Defendant's sales were known, Plaintiff's actual damages are irrelevant to a determination of statutory damages. It also argues that its request for an asset restraint prevents asset dissipation until a final accounting can be performed. [115] The Court agrees with Defendant, however, that the current asset restraint covers a substantial amount, including money that Defendant obtained from the sales of other products that is completely unrelated to this case. [117 at 3] A reduction is therefore appropriate. Plaintiff proposes that a significant (albeit lower) restraint be imposed given the list price of Defendant's hats and the considerable inventory Defendant has on hand. [115 at 6.] The current restrain is modified to reflect that any funds in excess of $150,000 must be released immediately by Alibaba. Mailed notice.
120 2025-05-29 DECLARATION of Jing Zhu (Exhibits) (Received via pro se online portal on 5/29/2025)
121 2025-05-29 REPLY by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. to Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's motion to modify asset restraint. (Received via pro se online portal on 5/29/2025)
122 2025-06-06 STATUS Report by TV Tokyo Corporation
123 2025-06-06 REPLY in Support Defendants' Motion to Reduce Asset Restraint filed by Defendant, Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 6/6/2025)
124 2025-06-06 EXHIBITS filed by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 6/6/2025)
127 2025-06-07 REVISED REPLY in Support Defendants' Motion to Reduce Asset Restraint filed by Defendant. Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 6/7/2025)
125 2025-06-09 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd has filed additional documents concerning its request to modify the asset restraint [121, 123, 124]. The court already granted the motion to modify the restraint and reduced it from $460,000 to $150,000. In so doing, the court considered the argument that there has been $0 in revenue from sales of the allegedly infringing products, but the court declined to reduce the restraint to $0. Given the list price of Defendant's hats and the considerable inventory Defendant has on hand (See Dkt. 115 at 6 "An asset restraint is appropriate given the fact that Defendant has disclosed an inventory of at least 1,000,000 hats priced from $0.95 to $1.68 per hat), some restraint remains necessary. The court has authority to freeze assets "to preserve an equitable accounting of profits, a remedy provided to counterfeiting victims by 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a)." Klipsch Grp., Inc. v. Big Box Store, Ltd., 2012 WL 5265727, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 24, 2012.) "The appropriate scope of prejudgment restraint must be limited only to what is reasonably necessary to secure the (future) equitable relief." Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, 2013 WL 12314399, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 31, 2013). "To exempt assets from an asset freeze, the burden is on the party seeking relief to present documentary proof that particular assets are not the proceeds of counterfeiting activities." Monster Energy Co. v. Wensheng, 136 F. Supp. 3d 897, 910 (N.D. Ill. 2015). Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co. has not presented an accounting of the restrained funds, so the Court declines to disturb the prior ruling. Roadget Bus. Pte. Ltd. v. Schedule A Hereto, No. 24 C 607, Doc. 77 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 16, 2024) (granting motion to modify asset restraint when defendants provided data obtained from online sales platform with accompanying affidavit from employee at online sales platform explaining how the platform collected the data). The restraint remains at $150,000. Mailed notice.
126 2025-06-09 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: As between Plaintiff and Defendant No. 224 "Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd," the status report states that the parties have exchanged written discovery. Based on the report, fact discovery will close by the June 27, 2025 deadline. The court modifies the proposed expert discovery schedule as follows: Plaintiff must disclose any expert witness by July 25, 2025 and any expert witness disclosed by Plaintiff must be deposed by August 29, 2025. By August 25, 2025, the parties must jointly file a status report that (a) confirms Plaintiff's expert witness discovery has concluded; and (b) confirms that Defendant intends to designate and disclose an expert witness. If Defendant intends to disclose an expert witness, then that that aspect of expert discovery must conclude by September 26, 2025. The court will then set a dispositive motion briefing schedule to commence in October 2025. Mailed notice.
128 2025-06-09 EXHIBITS filed by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 6/9/2025)
129 2025-06-11 SATISFACTION of Judgment
130 2025-06-12 DECLARATION of JING ZHU, the sole proprietor of Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Exhibits) (Received via pro se online portal on 6/12/2025)
131 2025-06-13 MOTION for Reconsider of Asset Restraint Reduction filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 6/13/2025)
132 2025-06-17 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for reconsideration [131] related to the asset freeze is denied. Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. has stated multiple times in multiple ways that the Asset Restraint should be reduced to $0 because revenue from sales of the allegedly infringing product is $0.00. The materials it submitted most recently hardly constitute an accounting: it has filed a one-page screenshot of an Alibaba "amount details page" that is nearly indecipherable to the court, and has not been subject to adversarial testing through fact discovery. The court already reduced the restraint but declines to eliminate it altogether for the reasons already explained. The schedule at docket entry [126] stands. Mailed notice.
133 2025-06-23 AFFIDAVIT of Custodial Certification filed by Liyi Lei. (Received via pro se online portal on 6/23/2025)
134 2025-06-24 SATISFACTION of Judgment
135 2025-06-25 MOTION for reconsider of asset restraint reduction filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 6/25/2025)
136 2025-06-27 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for extension of time Plaintiff's Opposed Motion to Extend the Discovery Deadline
137 2025-07-03 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins:Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co has submitted its third filing asking the court to modify the asset restraint. The most recent motion relies on the same information submitted with the second motion for reconsideration, that is the screenshot attached to docket entry [130] at page 3. It also cites to other district court cases where courts modified the restraint so as not to "exceed the profits generated from the sales." The court already took these matters into account when it concluded that a $460,000 asset restraint was unwarranted because it potentially included money that Defendant obtained from the sales of other products unrelated to this case. But the court declines, for the final time, to reduce the restraint to $0 or $3.80, which is the amount Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co says constitutes its revenue from sales of the allegedly infringing product. Fact discovery will reveal the extent of sales of infringing and unrelated products. The motion [135] is denied. The motion to extend fact discovery [136] is granted, though it is not clear whether Defendant opposes the request. Fact discovery is extended to July 28, 2025. The expert discovery schedule set by docket entry [126] stands, and the status report regarding expert discovery is due by August 25, 2025. Mailed notice.
[+] 138 2025-07-18 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation to compel Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery Requests of Defendant No. 224 "YIWU WENZAN APPAREL CO., LTD." and for Attorneys' Fees
140 2025-07-19 RESPONSE by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation to Defendant's first set of production requests. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/19/25)
141 2025-07-19 RESPONSE by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. to plaintiff's motion for compel response to discovery requests (Dkt. No. [138]) (Received via pro se online portal on 7/19/25)
142 2025-07-19 RESPONSE by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation to Defendant's No. 224 "Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd."S Interrogatories. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/19/25)
143 2025-07-19 SUPPLEMENT by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel CO., Ltd. to Defendant No. 224 Yiwu wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. Supplement for First set of discovery. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/19/25)
144 2025-07-19 DEFICIENCIES by Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. in Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant's first Set of Discovery Requests to Defendant No.224 Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/19/25)
139 2025-07-21 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion to compel and for attorney's fees as to Defendant No. 224 Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd is set for a telephonic status hearing on July 30, 2025, at 10:00 am CT. It is not clear the extent to which the parties met and conferred as required by LR 37.2. The motion references time Plaintiff expended meeting and conferring, but the details of those efforts are not spelled out. Defendant may file a brief in response to the motion to compel by July 28, 2025, and before the July 30 status hearing, the parties are directed to make a genuine effort to comply with LR 37.2 about their disagreements and be prepared to explain those efforts at the hearing. Attorneys/Parties should appear for the hearing by calling the Toll-Free Number: 855-244-8681, Access Code: 2302 225 8245. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing (use toll free number). Please, please be sure to keep your phone on mute when you are not speaking. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. Mailed notice.
145 2025-07-21 MOTION by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. for extend the deposition (Received via pro se online portal on 7/21/2025)
146 2025-07-23 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The court construes the motion to extend [145] as a request that the court allow Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd's upcoming deposition to taken place by zoom given its residence in China. It also requests the court change the date of the deposition from July 24, 2025 to July 28, 2025. It appears reasonable to allow the deposition to proceed virtually under the circumstances, and the court requests that Plaintiff's counsel accommodate that aspect of the motion (if counsel had not already communicated its willingness to do so). The court encourages the parties to work out an agreeable date and time for the deposition, but declines to order a specific date for the deposition, other than that the deposition must occur before the close of fact discovery on July 28, 2025. Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd is reminded that its response to the motion to compel and for attorney's fees is due by July 28, 2025 and the matter remains set for a telephonic hearing and ruling on July 30, 2025 at 10:00 am CT. Mailed notice.
147 2025-07-23 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claims filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/23/2025)
151 2025-07-25 RESPONSE to Plaintiff's Motion for Compel Responses to Discovery Request, Docket No. [138] filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/25/2025)
[+] 148 2025-07-28 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for extension of time Plaintiff's Motion to Extend Discovery Deadline, Compel the Deposition of Defendant No. 224 "YIWU WENZAN APPAREL CO., LTD." and Award Costs, Attorneys' Fees and Sanctions
157 2025-07-28 RESPONSE to Plaintiff's Motion for Motion to extend discovery deadline Dkt. No. [148] filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/28/2025)
149 2025-07-29 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion to dismiss [147] is denied. The court already denied Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd's motion to dismiss in a written order dated February 12, 2025. [See docket entry [103]]. This Defendant has also filed an answer, see docket entry [93], so the motion is procedurally improper and substantively frivolous, especially considering that fact discovery is nearing its end. The July 30, 2025 telephonic status hearing stands, where the court will address both Plaintiff's motion to compel and the motion to extend the fact discovery deadline. Defendant should be prepared to say (a) when he will provide answers to written discovery; and (b) when he will sit for his deposition. The court advises Defendant that it has the power to enter default judgment against a party to a case who violates discovery rules or other court orders, as one of several available sanctions. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 37(b)(2)(A)(vi). Greyer v. Ill. Dep't of Corr., 933 F.3d 871, 877 (7th Cir. 2019). Mailed notice.
153 2025-07-29 MOTION to compel responses to discovery requests of Plaintiff filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/29/2025)
150 2025-07-30 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Telephone conference held. For the reasons stated on the record, Plaintiff's motion to compel responses to discovery request of Defendant No. 224 Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co, Ltd. and for attorneys' fees [138] withdrawn. Plaintiff's motion to extend the discovery deadline and to compel the deposition of Defendant No. 224 Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co, Ltd. [148] is granted in part. Fact discovery is extended to August 29, 2025. The parties shall arrange for the Defendant's deposition by August 1, 2025 and for the remaining depositions during the week of August 4, 2025. Plaintiff shall submit a proposed protective order to the Judge's P.O. Box by or before August 6, 2025. Defendant shall respond to the written discovery deficiencies by August 6, 2025. By August 13, 2025, the parties shall jointly file a status report as to the progress of fact discovery. Mailed notice.
152 2025-07-31 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: After the telephone conference in this matter concluded on July 30, 2025, the clerk's office docketed Defendant's response to Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery responses [Dkt 151]. The document objects to Plaintiff's written discovery requests by stating things like "Plaintiff has not registered the red Cloud graphic copyright individually"; "Plaintiff has no right to make claim without holding copyright of red cloud graphic"; "in no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea"; and that "Copyright cannot cover the Red Cloud image." These statements are not responsive to the interrogatories, requests for production or requests to admit so the court overrules Defendant's objections. The motion to compel has been granted and Defendant must provide written responses to Plaintiff's discovery requests as previously ordered. To repeat, the court now orders Defendant to respond to written discovery by August 6, 2025 and the depositions discussed at the conference shall take place on the timeframe described. [see docket entry 150]. The court reiterates that it has the power to enter default judgment against a party to a case who violates discovery rules or other court orders, as one of several available sanctions. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 37(b)(2)(A)(vi). Greyer v. Ill. Dep't of Corr., 933 F.3d 871, 877 (7th Cir. 2019). Mailed notice
158 2025-07-31 MOTION to Obtain Counsel and extend the deposition and discovery deadline filed by Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. (Received via pro se online portal on 7/31/2025)
154 2025-08-01 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Enter Confidentiality Order. Mailed notice
155 2025-08-01 CONFIDENTIALITY Order Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 8/1/2025. Mailed notice
156 2025-08-01 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins:The motion to compel 153 is denied. Defendant issued a deficiency letter regarding Plaintiff's responses to interrogatories, requests to admit and requests to produce. Plaintiff's responses to that discovery have been docketed at entries 140, 142, 143 and 144. The court disagrees that Plaintiff's responses are deficient. Many of the answers direct Defendant to Plaintiff's Copyright Registration No. PA 2-276-002, which it provided with its responses. Defendant has requested "the high quality of the original cloud copyrighted artwork image," but the motion does not explain the need for this information in light of the registration information produced. Given that this case alleges that Defendant infringed Plaintiff's copyright, Plaintiff need not provide Defendant with "a high-quality image, digital file with meta data," when the image has been provided in the registration documents. None of Defendant's other arguments or objections are well taken, so the responses Plaintiff provided stand.Mailed notice
159 2025-08-05 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The court encourages Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. to obtain US counsel, but it declines the extend the fact discovery deadline beyond August 29, 2025. If Defendant obtains counsel and that person files an appearance in the case, the court will take up any issues regarding discovery at that time. But the previous deadlines and instructions and deadlines stand, see docket entries 150 and 152. Mailed notice.
[+] 160 2025-08-13 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation to compel Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery Requests, Produce Defendants for Deposition, Extend Discovery Deadline and Award Attorneys Fees, Costs and Sanctions Against Defendant No. 224 "YIWU WENZAN APPAREL CO., LTD."
161 2025-08-13 STATUS Report Joint Status Report by TV Tokyo Corporation
162 2025-08-14 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. by Adam M. Berger
163 2025-08-14 ORDER: The court issues the attached order on Plaintiff's motion to compel; the motion is entered and continued. As detailed in the order: 1. Jing Zhu must sit for a second deposition from Plaintiff by or before September 22, 2025, See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2)(A)(ii); and 2. Defendant must make S. Suave Lobodzinski and Xin Lan available for depositions by or before September 22, 2025; and 3. Defendant has one final opportunity to provide adequate responses to Plaintiff's outstanding written discovery, which must be submitted to Plaintiff by no later than August 21, 2025. Fact discovery is extended to September 29, 2025, and a joint status report is due by September 25, 2025. Once these things are accomplished, the court will provide Defendant an opportunity to respond in writing to the request for fees and costs associated with the motion and with the re-deposition the court has ordered. The court has now made crystal clear what Defendant and Jing Zhu must do to comply; any continued failure to comply with this order will result in entry of default judgment against Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. The court reiterates, for the final time, that following these instructions is the only way for Defendant and Jing Zhu to comply. No motion that it has filed or may file in the future will excuse Defendant or Jing Zhu from sitting for the deposition, making the witnesses listed above available for their depositions; and from answering written discovery. If Jing Zhu or Defendant chooses not to do what the court has ordered, they know what the consequence will be. "Parties ignore court orders at their peril." NLRB v. Haven Salon + Spa, Inc., 60 F.4th 1058, 1059 (7th Cir. 2023). Signed by the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins on 8/14/2025. Mailed notice.
164 2025-08-14 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Yiwu Wenzan Apparel Co., Ltd. by Jianwei Du
165 2025-09-25 STATUS Report Joint Status Report by TV Tokyo Corporation
166 2025-09-26 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The parties report that they have reached a settlement but need time to finalize their written settlement agreement. A stipulation of dismissal is due by October 6, 2025. Mailed notice.
167 2025-10-01 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: In light of the parties' pending resolution of the case, the motion to compel [160] is terminated as moot. Mailed notice.
168 2025-10-06 MOTION by Plaintiff TV Tokyo Corporation for extension of time Plaintiff's Motion for a First Extension of Time to File its Stipulation of Dismissal as to Defendant No. 224 "YIWU WENZAN APPAREL CO., LTD." [Dkt. No. 166]
169 2025-10-07 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for an extension of time 168 is granted. A stipulation of dismissal is now due by October 20, 2025. Mailed notice.