Tianx 2D

General

Total Cases1

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
03/30/23	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 56 in the amount of the Judgment Amount as to certain defendants (Christensen, Jake) (Entered: 03/30/2023)
02/02/23	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 56 in the amount of the Judgment Amount as to certain defendants (Christensen, Jake) (Entered: 02/02/2023)
10/05/22	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	AMENDED Schedule A (Gaudio, Justin) (Entered: 10/05/2022)
10/03/22	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal 60, which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendant No. 1 404_Slsntfound Store under Rule 41(a)(1). Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dismissing some, but not all, parties to an action. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) ("Rule 41(a) should be limited to dismissal of an entire action."). The court therefore construes plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by dropping defendant No. 1 404_Slsntfound Store from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff is directed to file an amended Schedule A form by 10/6/2022 identifying the remaining defendants. 404_Slsntfound Store terminated. (rao, ) (Entered: 10/03/2022) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's notice of dismissal 60, which seeks to voluntarily dismiss defendant No. 1 404_Slsntfound Store under Rule 41(a)(1). Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dismissing some, but not all, parties to an action. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) ("Rule 41(a) should be limited to dismissal of an entire action."). The court therefore construes plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal as a request for leave to amend the pleadings under Rule 15(a)(2) by dropping defendant No. 1 404_Slsntfound Store from the Schedule A form, see Taylor, 787 F.3d at 857-58, and the court grants plaintiff leave to amend the pleadings. Plaintiff is directed to file an amended Schedule A form by 10/6/2022 identifying the remaining defendants. 404_Slsntfound Store terminated. (rao, ) (Entered: 10/03/2022)
09/30/22	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Chrome Cherry Limited as to certain defendant (Christensen, Jake) (Entered: 09/30/2022)
08/29/22	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 56 in the amount of the Judgment Amount as to certain defendant (Christensen, Jake) (Entered: 08/29/2022)
03/10/22	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	NOTICE of withdrawal of SURETY bond 24 by John Summerfield. (rc, ) (Entered: 03/10/2022)
12/30/21	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	FULL SATISFACTION of Judgment regarding order 56 in the amount of the Judgment Amount as to certain defendant (Christensen, Jake) (Entered: 12/30/2021)
12/15/21	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER: Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 12/14/2021: Mailed notice. (rc, ) (Entered: 12/15/2021)
12/15/21	Chrome Cherry Ltd v. Kaneki Store 1:21-CV-02574 ( N.D. IL )	ORDER: In the court`s 10/1/2021 minute entry 54 , it gave all defendants until 10/8/2021 to object to plaintiffs` motion for entry of default and default judgment 48 . The court grants plaintiffs` motion 48 for entry of default and default judgment against all defendants identified on Schedule A attached to the court`s order. Based on the evidence submitted in support of the temporary restraining order and the motion for entry of default and default judgment, and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, plaintiffs have established that the infringement was willful, that damages should be awarded as set forth in the Final Judgment Order, and that a permanent injunction should be entered. Plaintiffs have shown that the infringement of its design patent causes it irreparable harm in the form of consumer confusion, loss of customers` goodwill, and reputational harm; that monetary damages are inadequate to address these harms; and that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction. No defendants have appeared to argue otherwise; thus, the court also finds that the balance of the hardships favors an injunction. The ten thousand dollar ($10,000) surety bond posted by plaintiff is hereby released to plaintiff`s counsel. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the $10,000 surety bond previously deposited with the Clerk of the Court to plaintiff`s counsel, Justin Gaudio, Greer Burns & Crain Ltd, 300 South Wacker Drive Suite 2500 Chicago, IL, 60606, via certified mail. Enter Final Judgment. Terminate civil case. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 12/14/2021. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 12/14/2021: Mailed notice. (rc, ) (Entered: 12/15/2021) ORDER: In the court`s 10/1/2021 minute entry 54 , it gave all defendants until 10/8/2021 to object to plaintiffs` motion for entry of default and default judgment 48 . The court grants plaintiffs` motion 48 for entry of default and default judgment against all defendants identified on Schedule A attached to the court`s order. Based on the evidence submitted in support of the temporary restraining order and the motion for entry of default and default judgment, and the admission of liability by virtue of the default, plaintiffs have established that the infringement was willful, that damages should be awarded as set forth in the Final Judgment Order, and that a permanent injunction should be entered. Plaintiffs have shown that the infringement of its design patent causes it irreparable harm in the form of consumer confusion, loss of customers` goodwill, and reputational harm; that monetary damages are inadequate to address these harms; and that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction. No defendants have appeared to argue otherwise; thus, the court also finds that the balance of the hardships favors an injunction. The ten thousand dollar ($10,000) surety bond posted by plaintiff is hereby released to plaintiff`s counsel. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the $10,000 surety bond previously deposited with the Clerk of the Court to plaintiff`s counsel, Justin Gaudio, Greer Burns & Crain Ltd, 300 South Wacker Drive Suite 2500 Chicago, IL, 60606, via certified mail. Enter Final Judgment. Terminate civil case. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 12/14/2021. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 12/14/2021: Mailed notice. (rc, ) (Entered: 12/15/2021)