Yung v. Trump
Plaintiff: J. Taikwok Yung
Defendant: Donald J. Trump
Counter Claimant: Donald J. Trump
Counter Defendant: J. Taikwok Yung
Case Number: 1:2011cv01413
Filed: March 22, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: Dora Lizette Irizarry
Presiding Judge: Viktor V. Pohorelsky
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 3, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 90 ORDER denying 84 Motion for Reconsideration -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN SUMMARY ORDER, Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is denied. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Summary Order to pro se plaintiff. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 3/3/2015. (Irizarry, Dora)
March 26, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 79 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS -- On February 28, 2014, the Hon. Viktor V. Pohorelsky issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") as to defendant's motion for damages and pro se plaintiff's motion for leave to fil e a sur-reply. Plaintiff timely objected and defendant opposed. For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN SUMMARY ORDER, and, upon due consideration, plaintiff's objections are overruled and the R&R is adopted in its entirety. Accordi ngly, it is hereby ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a sur-reply is denied; (2) defendant's motion for damages is granted; (3) defendant is awarded $8,000.00 per infringing domain name for a total judgment against plaintiff of $32,000.00; and plaintiff is ORDERED to transfer his interest in the domain names trumpmumbai.com, trumpindia.com, trumpbeijing.com, and trumpabudhabi.com to defendant within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Defendant is directed to serve a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Summary Order on pro se plaintiff within five days of the date of this Order and immediately thereafter file proof of such service with the Court via ECF. This case was previously ordered closed by Court Order. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 3/26/2014. (Irizarry, Dora)
February 28, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 56 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 38 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN OPINION AND ORDER, Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted with respect to his ACPA counterclai m and Plaintiff's ACPA declaratory judgment claim. In addition, the court: 1) denies as moot Defendant's motion for summary judgment on his federal and state trademark infringement and federal and state unfair competition counterclaims be cause of the court's holding that Defendant is entitled to relief under the ACPA; and 2) dismisses as moot Plaintiff's claim seeking a declaration that the Domain Names do not infringe on Defendant's trademark. The court certifies pur suant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 44445 ( 1962). In light of the court's ruling, the complaint is DISMISSED. However, the closure of this case is held in abeyance as Defendant seeks injunctive relief and other damages. Accordingly, no later than March 28, 2013, defendant shall file w ith the court a proposed permanent injunction order and its motion for damages. Defendant is reminded to provide hard courtesy copies to chambers immediately upon filing these documents. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Opinion and Order to pro se plaintiff. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 2/28/2013. (Irizarry, Dora)
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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Yung v. Trump
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Counter claimant: Donald J. Trump
Represented By: James D. Weinberger
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 ]
Defendant: Donald J. Trump
Represented By: James D. Weinberger
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 ]
Counter defendant: J. Taikwok Yung
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: J. Taikwok Yung
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?