BRIDLINGTON BUD LTD v. The Partnerships, Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
| Bridlington Bud, Ltd. |
| The Partnerships, Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, yang yu, jiujuyashangmao, yongdeyuzhenghaoshangmao, suizhoushiyuliyueshangmao, liaoweifeng, zhijiangshichuanrangshangmao, Huisang Technology, LE66YE, HappyCart Emporium, Guangshuishiqiangpoqu and qiumolin |
| 1:2025cv23971 |
| September 3, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein |
| K Michael Moore |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. § 1114 Trademark Infringement |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 17, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 12 Order on Motion for Temporary Restraining Order,,,,,,,,,,,,, Order on Motion for Service by Publication,,,,,,,,,,,, by Bridlington Bud, Ltd.. (Palmer, Andrew) |
| Filing 14 Notice of Entry of Parties Listed on #1 Complaint, into CM/ECF. NOTE: New Filer(s) will appear twice, since they are also a new party in the case. New Filer(s)/Party(s): yang yu, jiujuyashangmao, yongdeyuzhenghaoshangmao, suizhoushiyuliyueshangmao, liaoweifeng, zhijiangshichuanrangshangmao, Huisang Technology, LE66YE, HappyCart Emporium, Guangshuishiqiangpoqu and qiumolin. (Palmer, Andrew) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Filing Schedule A to the Complaint by Bridlington Bud, Ltd. re #1 Complaint, (Palmer, Andrew) |
Filing 12
PAPERLESS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. Plaintiff filed its Complaint #1 alleging trademark infringement and false designation of origin against Defendants listed on Schedule A. The Court just denied Plaintiff's Motion to File Schedule A Under Seal (ECF No. 7), and also noted that Plaintiff already filed Schedule A on the public docket as an exhibit to its Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, (ECF No. 8-3) at 12. (ECF No. 11). Schedule A lists 11 Defendants, but upon a review of the Complaint, the allegations are insufficient to justify joinder of multiple Defendants. Additionally, Plaintiff does not address in its Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 8) or its Motion for Service by Publication (ECF No. 9) why joinder of Defendants in this Action is proper. Trademark infringement actions such as this have become increasingly prevalent in the Southern District of Florida in recent years and have routinely been allowed to proceed without careful and independent judicial scrutiny as to whether Plaintiff has properly joined Defendants. "On motion or on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party. The court may also sever any claim against a party." Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. As it pertains to joinder of Defendants, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2) provides, in relevant part: "Persons--as well as a vessel, cargo, or other property subject to admiralty process in rem--may be joined in one action as defendants if: (A) any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and (B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action." Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2) (emphasis added). "The district court has broad discretion to join parties or not and that decision will not be overturned as long as it falls within the district court's range of choices." Swan v. Ray, 293 F.3d 1252, 1253 (11th Cir. 2002). Here, while there may well be common questions of law and fact as to some or all Defendants, it is not at all clear from the Complaint how the Defendants' alleged infringement "aris[e] out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2)(A). It is also not clear that any relief sought against Defendants is joint and several. Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before December 17, 2025 as to why Defendants, aside from the first named Defendant on Schedule A, should not be severed and dismissed. In its response, Plaintiff must set forth a proper basis for joinder under Rule 20 and explain why joinder would promote judicial economy. Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 8) and Motion for Service by Publication (ECF No. 9) are DENIED without prejudice. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 12/3/2025. (cr00)
|
|
Filing 11
PAPERLESS ORDER denying Plaintiff's Motion to File Under Seal. #7 . In the Motion, Plaintiff seeks an order allowing Plaintiff to file under Seal Schedule A to Plaintiff's Complaint. See id. at 1. Motions to file documents under seal or to proceed anonymously or pseudonymously in intellectual property rights cases are disfavored by the Court. See Landmark Commc'ns, Inc. v. Virginia, 435 U.S. 829, 839 (1978) ("The operations of the courts and the judicial conduct of judges are matters of utmost public concern."); Chicago Trib. Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1311 (11th Cir. 2001) ("The common-law right of access to judicial proceedings, an essential component of our system of justice, is instrumental in securing the integrity of the process."); Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d 320, 323 (11th Cir. 1992) ("It is the exceptional case in which a plaintiff may proceed under a fictitious name."). Accordingly, such motions shall be denied absent a showing of exceptional circumstances. See Brown v. Advantage Eng'g, Inc., 960 F. 2d 1013, 1016 (11th Cir. 1992). Here, Plaintiff's Motion fails to articulate exceptional circumstances necessitating the temporary sealing of portions of the court file. The Court also notes that Plaintiff has already filed Schedule "A" on the public docket as an exhibit to its Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. See (ECF No. 8-3) at 12. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion #7 is DENIED. Plaintiff shall file Schedule "A" as an attachment to the Complaint on the public docket on or before December 10, 2025. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 12/3/2025. (cr00)
|
| Filing 10 Certificate of Other Affiliates/Corporate Disclosure Statement - NONE disclosed by Bridlington Bud, Ltd. (Palmer, Andrew) |
| Filing 9 MOTION for Service by Publication by Bridlington Bud, Ltd.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Ex. 1 - Declaration of Palmer in support of Motion)(Palmer, Andrew) |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Bridlington Bud, Ltd.. Responses due by 10/3/2025. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Ex. 1 - Trademark Registration Information, #2 Exhibit Ex. 2 - Declaration of Andrew Palmer in support of Motion, #3 Exhibit Ex. 3 - Declaration of Yongkang Du in support of Motion, #4 Exhibit Ex. 4 - Infringing Evidence)(Palmer, Andrew) |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Seal per Local Rule 5.4 by Bridlington Bud, Ltd.. (Palmer, Andrew) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY PROCEDURES. Signed by Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein on 9/9/2025. See attached document for full details. (nan)
|
|
Filing 5
PAPERLESS ORDER REFERRING PRETRIAL DISCOVERY MATTERS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTY FULGUEIRA ELFENBEIN. PURSUANT to 28 U.S.C. 636 and the Magistrate Judge Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the above-captioned Cause is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein to take all necessary and proper action as required by law with respect to any and all pretrial discovery matters. Any motion affecting deadlines set by the Court's Scheduling Order is excluded from this referral, unless specifically referred by separate Order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall comply with Magistrate Judge Elfenbein's discovery procedures. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/8/2025. (cr00)
|
|
Filing 4
PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER. This order has been entered upon the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel is hereby ORDERED to forward to all defendants, upon receipt of a responsive pleading, a copy of this Order. It is further ORDERED that S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1 shall apply to this case and the parties shall hold a scheduling conference no later than twenty (20) days after the filing of the first responsive pleading by the last responding defendant, or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the complaint, whichever occurs first. However, if all defendants have not been served by the expiration of this deadline, Plaintiff shall move for an enlargement of time to hold the scheduling conference, not to exceed 90 days from the filing of the Complaint. Within ten (10) days of the scheduling conference, counsel shall file a joint scheduling report. Failure of counsel to file a joint scheduling report within the deadlines set forth above may result in dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorney's fees and costs. The parties should note that the time period for filing a joint scheduling report is not tolled by the filing of any other pleading, such as an amended complaint or Rule 12 motion. The scheduling conference may be held via telephone. At the conference, the parties shall comply with the following agenda that the Court adopts from S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1: (1) Documents (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.1 and 2) - The parties shall determine the procedure for exchanging a copy of, or a description by category and location of, all documents and other evidence that is reasonably available and that a party expects to offer or may offer if the need arises. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(B). (a) Documents include computations of the nature and extent of any category of damages claimed by the disclosing party unless the computations are privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(C). (b) Documents include insurance agreements which may be at issue with the satisfaction of the judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(D). (2) List of Witnesses - The parties shall exchange the name, address and telephone number of each individual known to have knowledge of the facts supporting the material allegations of the pleading filed by the party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(A). The parties have a continuing obligation to disclose this information. (3) Discussions and Deadlines (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.2) - The parties shall discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case. Failure to comply with this Order or to exchange the information listed above may result in sanctions and/or the exclusion of documents or witnesses at the time of trial. S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.I. The parties are hereby on notice that this Court requires all filings to be formatted in 12 point Times New Roman font and double spaced, including any footnotes, with one inch margins on all sides. Failure to follow these formatting guidelines may result in the filing being stricken, any opposing filing being granted by default, and the imposition of other sanctions, including attorney's fees and costs. Multiple Plaintiffs or Defendants shall file joint motions with co-parties unless there are clear conflicts of position. If conflicts of position exist, parties shall explain the conflicts in their separate motions. Failure to comply with ANY of these procedures may result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions, including but not limited to, the striking of the motion or dismissal of this action. The parties shall seek extensions of time in a timely fashion. "A motion for extension of time is not self-executing.... Yet, by filing these motions on or near the last day, and then sitting idle pending the Court's disposition of the motion, parties essentially grant their own motion. The Court will not condone this." Compere v. Nusret Miami, LLC, 2020 WL 2844888, at *2 (S.D. Fla. May 7, 2020) (internal citations omitted). Pursuant to Administrative Order 2016-70 of the Southern District of Florida and consistent with the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit's Local Rules and Internal Operating Procedures, within three (3) days of the conclusion of a trial or other proceeding, parties must file via CM/ECF electronic versions of documentary exhibits admitted into evidence, including photographs of non-documentary physical exhibits. The Parties are directed to comply with each of the requirements set forth in Administrative Order 2016-70 unless directed otherwise by the Court.Telephonic appearances are not permitted for any purpose. Upon reaching a settlement in this matter the parties are instructed to notify the Court by telephone and to file a Notice of Settlement within twenty-four (24) hours. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/8/2025. (cr00)
|
| Filing 3 FORM AO 120 SENT TO DIRECTOR OF U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK (Attachments: #1 Complaint, #2 Exhibit 1, #3 Exhibit 2, #4 Exhibit 3, #5 Exhibit 4) (nan) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge K. Michael Moore. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. (nan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against The Partnerships, Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A. Filing fees $ 405.00 receipt number AFLSDC-18754746, filed by BRIDLINGTON BUD LTD. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Ex. 1 - Trademark Registration Information, #2 Exhibit Ex. 2 - US CBP Report, #3 Exhibit Ex. 3 - Law Journal Article, #4 Exhibit Ex. 4 - US DHS Report, #5Civil Cover Sheet)(Palmer, Andrew) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
