Qiaosheng Co Ltd

General

Total Cases2

Active Cases--

Patents--

CourtsN.D. Illinois

TypeOperating Company

Elite Ratings

--

--

--

--

Ratings

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

--

--

--

PTAB

--

--

--

CAFC

--

--

--

Analytics

Cases

Litigated Patents

Ratings Trends

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
10/02/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by MD, LLC as to Certain Defendants (Judge, James) (Entered: 10/02/2024)
10/02/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	DEFAULT JUDGMENT ORDER: Signed by the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly on 10/2/2024. Mailed notice. (mma, ) (Entered: 10/02/2024)
10/02/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Plaintiff's motion for default judgment [48] is granted. Default Judgment Order to follow. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice. (mma, ) (Entered: 10/02/2024)
10/01/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	MOTION by Plaintiff MD, LLC for default judgment as to Certain Defendants (Attachments: # [1] Memorandum in Support of Motion, # [2] Schedule A)(Judge, James) (Entered: 10/01/2024)
09/11/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Plaintiff's motion for extension of time [46] is granted; the deadline for filing any and all motions for default judgment is extended to 10/1/2024. The telephonic status hearing set for 9/17/2024 is vacated and reset to 10/8/2024 at 8:55 AM, using call-in number 650-479-3207, access code 2305-915-8729. (mk) (Entered: 09/11/2024)
09/10/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	MOTION by Plaintiff MD, LLC for extension of time to file Motion for Default (Judge, James) (Entered: 09/10/2024)
09/09/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Order: It has come to the Court's attention that the access code for its telephonic conference line was changed without notice. For any telephonic hearing set in this case the following call-in number will be used: 650-479-3207; access code 2305-915-8729. That is the number that should be used for any telephonic hearing in this case after today's date. Mailed notice (tg, ) (Entered: 09/09/2024) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Order: It has come to the Court's attention that the access code for its telephonic conference line was changed without notice. For any telephonic hearing set in this case the following call-in number will be used: 650-479-3207; access code 2305-915-8729. That is the number that should be used for any telephonic hearing in this case after today's date. Mailed notice (tg, ) (Entered: 09/09/2024)
08/27/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by MD, LLC as to Certain Defandants (Judge, James) (Entered: 08/27/2024)
08/23/24	MD LLC v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-04014 ( N.D. IL )	NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by MD, LLC as to Defendant Pan Car Storage (Judge, James) (Entered: 08/23/2024)
08/21/24	Huang v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations 1:24-CV-05569 ( N.D. IL )	MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr:The plaintiff's motion for entry of a preliminary injunction 85 86 is denied without prejudice. A court may issue a preliminary injunction only on notice to adverse parties, Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(1), and here the plaintiff has not adequately attested to its notification efforts. The plaintiff declares [85-1] that "[a]ll Defendants listed in this action and provided on Schedule A have been forward a [pertinent] link," and the returned summons 84 indicates that plaintiff's counsel "obtained contact information for defendants on Schedule A" and "served defendants via email." But neither piece of information identifies the specific email addresses (corresponding to the specific defendants) served. The plaintiff is afforded leave to file a declaration of serviceexpressly identifying which defendants have received proper servicealong with a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction. The Court declines to extend the TRO, which expires today, at this juncture. In extending the TRO 30 31 , the Court (1) "cautioned" the plaintiff "to read orders carefully and comply with all deadlines set by the Court," and (2) specified that a motion for a preliminary injunction "must be served at least three business days prior to the [TRO's] expiration." The plaintiff's preliminary injunction motion was not served three business days prior to the expiration of the TRO, the Court sees no reason to excuse the plaintiff's noncompliance. Mailed notice (air, ) (Entered: 08/21/2024) MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr:The plaintiff's motion for entry of a preliminary injunction 85 86 is denied without prejudice. A court may issue a preliminary injunction only on notice to adverse parties, Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(1), and here the plaintiff has not adequately attested to its notification efforts. The plaintiff declares [85-1] that "[a]ll Defendants listed in this action and provided on Schedule A have been forward a [pertinent] link," and the returned summons 84 indicates that plaintiff's counsel "obtained contact information for defendants on Schedule A" and "served defendants via email." But neither piece of information identifies the specific email addresses (corresponding to the specific defendants) served. The plaintiff is afforded leave to file a declaration of serviceexpressly identifying which defendants have received proper servicealong with a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction. The Court declines to extend the TRO, which expires today, at this juncture. In extending the TRO 30 31 , the Court (1) "cautioned" the plaintiff "to read orders carefully and comply with all deadlines set by the Court," and (2) specified that a motion for a preliminary injunction "must be served at least three business days prior to the [TRO's] expiration." The plaintiff's preliminary injunction motion was not served three business days prior to the expiration of the TRO, the Court sees no reason to excuse the plaintiff's noncompliance. Mailed notice (air, ) (Entered: 08/21/2024)