Doe Corporation 1 et al v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
Plaintiff: Doe Corporation 1 and Doe Corporation 2
Defendant: Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
Case Number: 1:2020cv00395
Filed: September 16, 2020
Court: US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Presiding Judge: KENNETH J MANSFIELD
Referring Judge: J MICHAEL SEABRIGHT
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1114
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 29, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 4, 2020 Filing 19 EO: In light of Plaintiffs' request in their October 28, 2020 letter requesting a continuance of the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference currently set for 11/16/2020, the Court CONTINUES the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference TO 09:30AM on 1/4/2021 before MAGISTRATE JUDGE KENNETH J. MANSFIELD. Scheduling Conference Statements are due on 12/28/2020.Parties are to participate via telephone through the court's AT&T Service. Call-in information for this conference is below. Parties must connect to the conference at least five (5) minutes before the hearing's scheduled start time.Dial in number is 1-877-848-7030Access Code is 2123668 (MAGISTRATE JUDGE KENNETH J. MANSFIELD)(mansfield3)
November 3, 2020 Filing 18 Email to Magistrate Judge Kenneth J. Mansfield from Glenn T. Melchinger, Esq., dated October 28, 2020, Re: request to continue Rule 16 Scheduling Conference set for November 16, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. (jo)
November 2, 2020 Filing 17 EO: Plaintiffs' Amended Ex Parte Motion to Proceed Temporarily Under Pseudonym and to File Reference Lists and Identifying Information Under Seal, ECF No. #16 ("Amended Pseudonym Motion") is DENIED without prejudice.The arguments in the Amended Pseudonym Motion are unsupported by prima facie evidence of a strong showing that Plaintiffs are entitled to immediate relief. Although the Amended Pseudonym Motion described in greater detail the nature of Plaintiffs' intended injunctive relief motion, it fails to support Plaintiffs' arguments with proof, i.e., evidence.The court's October 9, 2020 Order Denying Without Prejudice Motion to Redact Complaint, ECF No. #13 , explained that the relief sought "will turn largely on the strength of the evidence supporting Plaintiffs' allegations, whether brought to the court's attention in an Amended Pseudonym Motion or in an appropriate motion seeking temporary or preliminary injunctive relief (or both)." Id. at PageID # 74. The October 9, 2020 Order allowed, but did not require, Plaintiffs to file their substantive injunctive relief motion at the same time as the Amended Pseudonym Motion. But even filed by itself, the Amended Pseudonym Motion still required strong evidence to support the allegations before the court would allow (even temporarily) the pseudonyms and redactions sought by Plaintiffs. As the court stated in the October 9, 2020 Order, "[t]he court will not seal the parties' names and the products in this case without a strong showing that Plaintiffs are entitled to immediate relief preserving the status quo as well as the 'other relief' sought." Id. at PageID # 75. To be clear, Plaintiffs must make that "strong showing" through evidence. Moreover, it would be particularly helpful if Plaintiffs provided specific evidence of prior situations where defendants have taken "evasive" action in other courts upon learning of (public) enforcement actions as described by counsel. See Melchinger Decl. 3, ECF No. 16-1 at PageID # 93.Accordingly, the Amended Pseudonym Motion is DENIED without prejudice to Plaintiffs making the necessary showing by a supplemental filing on or before November 16, 2020. Further, although Plaintiffs cite to examples of courts that have granted similar ex parte relief as that sought here, the court also directs Plaintiffs to notify the court (if Plaintiffs are aware) of orders that have denied similar requests to proceed with pseudonyms in trademark infringement actions. If a "strong showing that Plaintiffs are entitled to immediate relief" is not made by that date, the court will proceed to either (1) unseal the Complaint (by filing the unredacted version of the Complaint, Reference List, and Exhibit A) or (2) allow Plaintiffs to dismiss the Complaint. (CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT)(rlfh)
October 30, 2020 Filing 16 EX PARTE Motion -Amended- to Proceed Temporarily Under Pseudonym and To File Reference Lists And Identifying Information Under Seal Glenn T. Melchinger appearing for Plaintiffs Doe Corporation 1, Doe Corporation 2 (Attachments: #1 Declaration Decl. Glenn Melchinger, #2 Exhibit Ex. 1 (sample order), #3 Exhibit Redacted Reference list re Plaintiffs)(Melchinger, Glenn)
October 20, 2020 Filing 15 EO: The entering order of October 19, 2020, ECF No. 14 , is AMENDED to replace "Defendants" with "Plaintiffs" to read as follows:Plaintiffs state that they have no objection to the unsealing of ECF Nos. #7 and #10 (with any current redactions). See October 16, 2020 response to the court's October 9, 2020 Order to Show Cause in In re: Civil Beat Law Center for the Public Interest, Misc. No. 20-00443 JMS-KJM. The docket entries were automatically sealed after being filed on an "ex parte" basis.Given Plaintiffs' statement, the court ORDERS that (1) ECF No. #7 (Plaintiffs' "Ex Parte Motion to Proceed Temporarily Under Pseudonym and to File Reference Lists Under Seal") and (2) ECF No. #10 (Plaintiffs' "Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File Complaint; Schedule A, Publicly with Redactions and Submit Unredacted Version Under Seal") be UNSEALED. This unsealing also pertains to associated filings (i.e., ECF Nos. 7-1, 7-2, 7-3, 10-1, 10-2). Any current redactions on these documents shall remain, at least until further order from the court. (CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT)(rlfh)
October 19, 2020 Filing 14 EO: Defendants state that they have no objection to the unsealing of ECF Nos. 7 and 10 (with any current redactions). See October 16, 2020 response to the court's October 9, 2020 Order to Show Cause in In re: Civil Beat Law Center for the Public Interest, Misc. No. 20-00443 JMS-KJM. The docket entries were automatically sealed after being filed on an "ex parte" basis.Given Defendants' statement, the court ORDERS that (1) ECF No. 7 (Plaintiffs' "Ex Parte Motion to Proceed Temporarily Under Pseudonym and to File Reference Lists Under Seal") and (2) ECF No. 10 (Plaintiffs' "Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File Complaint; Schedule A, Publicly with Redactions and Submit Unredacted Version Under Seal") be UNSEALED. This unsealing also pertains to associated filings (i.e., ECF Nos. 7-1, 7-2, 7-3, 10-1, 10-2). Any current redactions on these documents shall remain, at least until further order from the court. (CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT)(tl)
October 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION TO REDACT COMPLAINT, ECF NO. #10 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 10/9/2020. Plaintiffs' "Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File Complaint [and] Schedule A Publicly with Redactions and Submit Unredacted Version Under Seal," ECF No. #10 , is DENIED without prejudice. The court will consider the issue in conjunction with Plaintiff's Amended Pseudonym Motion, which must be filed by October 30, 2020. Meanwhile, the Complaint may remain in its present redacted form. (jo)
October 2, 2020 Filing 12 MEMORANDUM re 11 Link,,,,, [SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE COMPLAINT; SCHEDULE A, PUBLICLY WITH REDACTIONS AND SUBMIT UNREDACTED VERSION UNDER SEAL], filed by Doe Corporation 1, Doe Corporation 2. (Melchinger, Glenn)
September 25, 2020 Filing 11 EO: The court has received an "Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File Complaint; Schedule A, Publicly with Redactions and Submit Unredacted Version Under Seal," ECF No. #10 . The court is always concerned with protecting the public's interests and rights in favor of access to court records, and as part of that duty, requires parties seeking to seal certain information to meet appropriate standards. Plaintiffs' ex parte motion addresses the "good cause" standard in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006), but does not address a subsequent case, Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101 (9th Cir. 2016) ("more than tangentially related to the merits of a case"). Further, the ex parte motion assumes that because a complaint is not "dispositive," the "good cause" standard applies. Under Center for Auto Safety, however, this is incorrect. Specifically, Plaintiffs do not address whether they need to (and if so, whether they do) meet a "compelling reasons" standard. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are requested to file a supplement memorandum limited to 5 pages addressing Center for Auto Safety. A supplemental memorandum, which may be filed on an ex parte basis under seal, is due by October 2, 2020. (CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT)(rlfh)
September 25, 2020 Filing 10 EX PARTE Motion FOR LEAVE TO FILE COMPLAINT; SCHEDULE A, PUBLICLY WITH REDACTIONS AND SUBMIT UNREDACTED VERSION UNDER SEAL, Glenn T. Melchinger appearing for Plaintiffs Doe Corporation 1, Doe Corporation 2 (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Glenn T. Melchinger, #2 [Proposed] Order Granting Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File Complaint; Schedule A, Publicly with Redactions and Submit Unredacted Version Under Seal)(Melchinger, Glenn)
September 17, 2020 Filing 9 SEALED EP: Status Conference conducted by telephone conference held UNDER SEAL. (Reporter-Cynthia Fazio) (CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT) (jo)
September 17, 2020 Filing 8 EO: SEALED Status Conference to be conducted by telephone conference is set for 09/17/2020 at 03:00 PM before CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT. Parties are to participate via the court's AT&T teleconference services. Courtroom manager to provide call-in information. Parties must connect to the conference at least five (5) minutes prior to the scheduled start time of the hearing.(CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT)(rlfh) Modified on 9/17/2020 (rlfh).
September 17, 2020 Filing 7 EX PARTE Motion to Proceed Temporarily Under Pseudonym and to File Reference Lists Under Seal, Glenn T. Melchinger appearing for Plaintiffs Doe Corporation 1, Doe Corporation 2 (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Glenn T. Melchinger, #2 REDACTED - Reference List, #3 PROPOSED - Order Granting Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Motion to Proceed Temporarily Under Pseudonym and to File Reference Lists Under Seal)(Melchinger, Glenn)
September 16, 2020 Filing 6 CIVIL Waiver of Service Packet ~ Notice to Parties Regarding Service Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Attachments: #1 AO 398 Notice of Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of Summons, #2 AO 399 Waiver of Service of Summons) (emt, )
September 16, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 5 Order Setting Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set for 09:30AM on 11/16/2020 before MAGISTRATE JUDGE KENNETH J. MANSFIELD - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 9/16/2020. (Attachments: #1 Memo from Clerk Re: Corporate Disclosure Statements) ATTACH THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO THE INITIATING DOCUMENT (COMPLAINT/NOTICE OF REMOVAL). THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND MEMO RE: CORPORATE DISCLOSURES MUST BE SERVED WITH THE DOCUMENT. (emt, )
September 16, 2020 Filing 4 CIVIL Cover Sheet by Doe Corporation 1, Doe Corporation 2. (Melchinger, Glenn)
September 16, 2020 Filing 3 NOTICE of Case Assignment: Please reflect Civil case number CV 20-00395 JMS-KJM on all further pleadings. (emt, )
September 16, 2020 Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Doe Corporation 1, Doe Corporation 2. (Melchinger, Glenn)
September 16, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT ; SCHEDULE A; SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION, against Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0975-2423466.), filed by Doe Corporation 1, Doe Corporation 2. (Attachments: #1 [Redacted] SCHEDULE A to Complaint, #2 [Proposed] SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION)(Melchinger, Glenn)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Doe Corporation 1 et al v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Doe Corporation 1
Represented By: Paul Alston
Represented By: Glenn T. Melchinger
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Doe Corporation 2
Represented By: Paul Alston
Represented By: Glenn T. Melchinger
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?