|
[+]
1
|
2026-09-25 |
COMPLAINT filed by Chrome Hearts LLC; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-25716527. |
|
|
Exhibit 1 |
|
|
Exhibit 2 |
|
2
|
2026-09-25 |
SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC Schedule A regarding complaint[1] |
|
3
|
2026-09-25 |
SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC Exhibit 3 - Parts 1-4 regarding complaint[1] |
|
4
|
2026-09-25 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC for leave to file under seal |
|
5
|
2026-09-25 |
CIVIL Cover Sheet |
|
6
|
2026-09-25 |
NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Chrome Hearts LLC |
|
7
|
2026-09-25 |
Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Chrome Hearts LLC |
|
8
|
2026-09-25 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC by Justin R. Gaudio |
|
9
|
2026-09-25 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC by Amy Crout Ziegler |
|
10
|
2026-09-25 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC by Trevor Christian Talhami |
|
[+]
11
|
2026-09-25 |
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC by Madeline Halgren |
|
|
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Beth W. Jantz. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). |
|
|
CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. |
|
12
|
2026-09-28 |
MAILED trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA |
|
13
|
2026-09-28 |
MAILED copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC |
|
14
|
2026-09-28 |
MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials |
|
15
|
2026-09-28 |
NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Chrome Hearts LLC as to a Certain Defendant |
|
16
|
2026-09-28 |
MOTION by Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC for temporary restraining order including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery |
|
17
|
2026-09-28 |
MEMORANDUM by Chrome Hearts LLC in support of motion for temporary restraining order[16] |
|
18
|
2026-09-28 |
DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[17] |
|
[+]
19
|
2026-09-28 |
DECLARATION of Mario Lejtman regarding memorandum in support of motion[17] |
|
|
Exhibit 1 |
|
|
Exhibit 2 |
|
20
|
2026-09-28 |
SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Chrome Hearts LLC Exhibit 3 - Parts 1-3 regarding declaration[19] |
|
21
|
2026-09-30 |
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: The Court requires that any motion for a temporary restraining order and/or asset freeze is accompanied by a declaration from an attorney of record that provides the following information. First, to demonstrate the immediate harm necessary to grant the drastic remedy of an ex parte temporary restraining order, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant has sold or offered to sell the allegedly infringing product(s) within the last two months and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Generally, evidence that a defendant has sold or offered to sell the infringing products within the last two months may include: (1) screenshots of the listings collected within the last two months; (2) screenshots older than two months with an attestation that the listings reflected in the screenshots have been checked within the last two months and were active; or (3) evidence of a purchase by a customer in Illinois within the last two months. Second, as relevant to personal jurisdiction, without which any temporary restraining order or asset freeze would be invalid, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant sold at least one allegedly infringing product to a customer in Illinois and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Here, "sold" means that the defendant accepted an order and payment for an allegedly infringing product to be shipped to Illinois. Third, to assure that Court that the rights of defendants who have not yet been served are being appropriately protected, the declaration must identify the case number(s) and assigned judge(s) for any pending case(s) brought by the plaintiff(s) against any of the named defendants, noting whether the intellectual property at issue was the same or different than in this case. If it is the same, the declaration should describe the disposition of the other case. The Court will address any motion for a temporary restraining order only after receipt of the described declaration, which can be filed contemporaneously with the motion. Additionally, to the extent Plaintiff also makes a motion for expedited discovery or for an order permitting electronic service of process, Plaintiff should submit a proposed order for that relief that is separate from the proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint. The proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint should name the relevant defendants directly in the order, without reference to Schedule A. Mailed notice. |
