Google Incorporated, et al v. Leo Stoller

Filing 1

Private civil case docketed. Fee due. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Leo D. Stoller by 10/26/2009. Transcript information sheet due by 11/03/2009. Fee or IFP forms due on 11/03/2009 for Appellant Leo D. Stoller. Record on Appeal from Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division due by 11/10/2009. [6169487-2] [09-3569]

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 1 of 45

SHORT RECORD APPEAL 09-3569 FILED 10/20/09

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 2 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 3 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 4 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 5 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 6 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 7 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 8 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 9 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 10 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 11 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 12 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 13 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 14 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 15 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 16 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 17 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 18 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 19 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 20 of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00385

Document 141

Filed 10/20/2009

Page 21 of 45

SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS INFORMATION SHEET Include the names of all plaintiffs (petitioners) and defendants (respondents) who are parties to the appeal. Use a separate sheet if needed.
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION DOCKET NUMBER: PLAINTIFF (Petitioner) Stoller/appellant movant v. 07 cv 385

DEFENDANT (Respondent) Central Mfg/appellee

(Use separate sheet for additional counsel) PETITIONER'S COUNSEL Name Firm Address Phone Leo Stoller pro-se 7115 W. North Ave. Oak Park, Il. 60302 Name Firm Address Phone RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL Lance G. Johnson Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman 1300 19th St. Street, NW Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 202) 659-9076

Other Information District Judge Court Reporter Nature of Suit Code Kendall A. Metzler X-408-5154 470 Date Filed in District Court Date of Judgment Date of Notice of Appeal 1/19/07 10/16/09 10/19/09

COUNSEL:

Appointed

Retained

Pro Se

X

FEE STATUS:

Paid IFP Pending

Due U.S.

IFP Waived

X

Has Docketing Statement been filed with the District Court Clerk's Office?

Yes

No

X

If State/Federal Habeas Corpus (28 USC 2254/28 USC 2255), was Certificate of Appealability: Granted Denied Pending

If Certificate of Appealability was granted or denied, date of order: If defendant is in federal custody, please provide U.S. Marshall number (USM#):

IMPORTANT: THIS FORM IS TO ACCOMPANY THE SHORT RECORD SENT TO THE CLERK OF THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS PURSUANT TO CIRCUIT RULE 3(A). Rev 04/01

Order Form (01/2005)

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 134

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 22 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 1 4

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Name of Assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge

Virginia M. Kendall 07 C 385

Sitting Judge if Other than Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER CASE TITLE
DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

DATE

10/16/2009

GOOGLE INC vs. CENTRAL MANUFACTURING INC et al

Stoller's motion for reconsideration is denied.

O[ For further details see text below.]

Notices mailed by Judicial staff.

STATEMENT Before the Court is Leo Stoller's ("Stoller") Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's August 17, 2009 Memorandum Opinion and Order denying his Motion to Intervene. ®. 111.) For the reasons stated, Stoller's Motion for Reconsideration is denied. Plaintiff Google, Inc. ("Google") filed a civil RICO action against Defendants Central Mfg. Inc. ("Central") a/k/a Central Mf. Co. a/k/a Central Mfg. Co (Inc.) a/k/a Central Manufacturing Company Inc. a/k/a Central Mfg. Co. of Illinois and Stealth Industries, Inc. ("Rentamark") a/k/a Rentamark and a/k/a Rentamark.com (collectively "Defendants") on January 19, 2007, alleging, among other things, that the Defendants and their purported principal, Stoller, are engaged in a scheme of falsely claiming trademark rights for the purpose of attempting to extort money out of legitimate commercial actors. ®. 1.) On February 6, 2007, Stoller filed a Motion to Intervene in this action which the Court denied, finding that Stoller did not have a "direct, significant legally protectable interest" in the suit because he was acting as president of the "corporate" defendants when he undertook the actions described in the Complaint, and that as a result of his bankruptcy case he no longer held a stake in those businesses. ®. 16, R. 38.) Subsequently, the Court approved the settlement agreed to by Google and the Trustee of Stoller's bankruptcy estate and entered the permanent injunction contemplated by that agreement. ®. 57-58.) Stoller appealed both the denial of his motion to intervene and the final judgment in the lawsuit. The Seventh Circuit consolidated Stoller's appeals, vacated the final judgment issued and remanded the case for reconsideration of Stoller's Motion to Intervene. See Google, Inc. v. Central Mfg. Inc. and Stealth Industries, Inc., Nos. 07-1569, 07-1612, 07-1651, 2008 WL 896376, at *5 (7th Cir. 2008). In remanding the case, the Seventh Circuit directed the Court to "resolve in the first instance whether [Central and Rentamark] are entities that are subject to suit, whether and under what circumstances Goolge's suit in its present form can proceed without Stoller if they are not, and whether any of the unlawful conduct Google alleges gave rise to a claim that even involves the Chapter 7 estate." Id. After receiving the mandate, the Court reinstated Stoller's Motion to Intervene and permitted him to file a supplemental brief in support of his motion. ®. 93.)
07C385 GOOGLE INC vs. CENTRAL MANUFACTURING INC et al Page 1 of 4

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 134 Filed 10/20/2009 Page 23 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 2 4 STATEMENT On August 17, 2009, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order denying Stoller's Motion to Intervene finding that despite the fact that Central and Rentamark are Stoller's alter egos, Stoller cannot use the doctrine of "piercing the corporate veil" offensively to defend a lawsuit. ®. 110, at 7.) The Court noted that piercing the corporate veil is utilized only to protect third parties who have relied on the existence of the separate corporate entity, not for the benefit of the corporation itself or its shareholders. See id. After determining that Stoller was not permitted to intervene as a matter of right, per the Seventh Circuit's mandate, the Court ordered the parties to submit position papers on whether Central and Rentamark are entities that are subject to suit, and whether Google's claim arose prior to or after Stoller filed for bankruptcy to determine whether Google's claim even involves the Chapter 7 estate. (R. 110, at 9.) In its position paper, submitted on September 30, 2009, Google notified the Court that The Society for the Prevention of Trademark Abuse, LLC (the "SPTA") acquired all stock and other assets of Central and Rentamark in a bankruptcy auction under the auspices and with the approval of the Bankruptcy Court. ®. 121, at 1.)1 Therefore, Stoller's Chapter 7 Trustee is no longer Central and Rentamark's representative but instead the entities are now under the ownership and control of the SPTA. ®. 121, at 2; R. 122-2, at 16-60.) On August 20, 2007, the same day that the SPTA acquired ownership of Central and Rentamark, the SPTA, as the new stockholder of the corporate entity Defendants, removed Stoller from "any and all positions, offices and capacities in connection with each of the corporations." ®. 121, at 3; R. 122-2, at 62-63.) Subsequently, on January 29, 2008 and April 24, 2008, the SPTA dissolved Central and Rentamark. ®. 121, at 4; R. 122, Exs., 13, 14.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) serves the limited function of allowing courts to correct manifest errors of law or fact or consider newly discovered material evidence. See Bordelon v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. Of Trustees, 233 F.3d 524, 529 (7th Cir. 2000); see also Oto v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 224 F.3d 601, 606 (7th Cir. 2000) (manifest error is the wholesale disregard, misapplication, or failure to recognize controlling precedent). However, Rule 59(e) "does not provide a vehicle for a party to undo its own procedural failures, and it certainly does not allow a party to introduce new evidence or advance legal arguments that could and should have been presented to the district court prior to the judgment." Moro v. Shell Oil Co., 91 F.3d 872, 876 (7th Cir. 1996). Reconsideration is only appropriate when "the Court has patently misunderstood a party or has made a decision outside the adversarial issues presented to the Court by the parties or has made an error not of reasoning but of apprehension." Bank of Waunakee v. Rochester Cheese Sales, Inc., 906 F.2d 1185, 1191 (7th Cir. 1990) (internal quotations omitted). Whether to grant a Rule 59(e) motion "is entrusted to the sound judgment of the district court." Matter of Prince, 85 F.3d 314, 324 (7th Cir. 1996). Stoller's Motion for Reconsideration sets forth no newly discovered material evidence and does not identify any controlling precedent that the Court failed to recognize, misapplied or wholly disregarded. Instead, it reiterates Stoller's previous argument that "Leo Stoller has a protectable interest in this case which the existing parties may not adequately represent Stoller's interests," and goes on to assert that his "reputation" as a "nationally recognized trademark expert" will be permanently damaged if he is not allowed to defend himself in this case. ®. 111, at 3.) Although the Court must construe pro se filings liberally, even litigants proceeding without the benefit of counsel must articulate some reason for disturbing the Court's judgment. See Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir. 2001). Here, Stoller offers no articulable basis for disturbing the Court's previous ruling denying his Motion to Intervene. Courts have repeatedly held that purported injury to one's reputation is an insufficient interest for intervention of right. See e.g., People Who Care v. Rockford Bd. of Educ., Sch. Dist. No. 205, 179 F.R.D. 551, 562 (N.D. Ill. 1998) (effect on "political reputation" not a legally cognizable interest for intervention of right). Furthermore, this argument was available to Stoller when he filed his opening, supplemental and reply brief in support of his Motion to Intervene; he has not set for any newly discovered evidence. Google, however, has submitted new evidence to the Court which further supports the Court's denial of Stoller's Motion to Intervene; Stoller no longer has any interest or ownership in either Central or Rentamark and therefore has no interest related "to the property or the transaction which is the subject of the action." See
07C385 GOOGLE INC vs. CENTRAL MANUFACTURING INC et al Page 2 of 4

CCase 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 ase 1:07-cv-00385 Document 134

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 24 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 3 4

STATEMENT Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a). Accordingly, Stoller has failed to establish that the Court erred as to law or fact or that he has newly discovered material evidence. See Bordelon, 233 F.3d at 529. A meritorious motion to reconsider is rare and under Stoller's circumstances should not be granted. See Bank of Waunakee, 906 F.2d at 1191. Therefore, Stoller's Motion to Reconsider is denied. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, since the Seventh Circuit's mandate, the Court has received new material information related to the corporate entity Defendants and Stoller's interest in those Defendants. Therefore, when the Seventh Circuit issued its mandate it did so under a different set of facts and circumstances. Currently, the corporate entity Defendants, Central and Rentamark, are no longer part of Stoller's bankruptcy estate but instead are currently under the control and ownership of the SPTA and the SPTA removed Stoller from "any and all positions, offices, and capacities in connection with each of the corporations." ®. 121.) Therefore, Google's claims against Central and Rentamark no longer involve Stoller's Chapter 7 estate. Furthermore, the circumstances giving rise to the Seventh Circuit's concern as to whether Central and Rentamark are entities that are subject to suit no longer exist because under the ownership and control of the SPTA they are no longer Stoller's alter egos. See Palen v. Daewoo Motor Co., 832 N.E. 2d 173, 185 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005) (suits against legally nonexistent entities renders the suit void ab initio). Put another way, after the SPTA acquired all stock and assets in Central and Rentamark, they became corporate entities distinguishable from Stoller and not just trade names through which Stoller conducts business as an individual, making them entities that are subject to suit.2 Lastly, in his Motion for Reconsideration Stoller requests that the Court suspend the current action pending his appeal of the denial of his Motion to Intervene if his Motion to Reconsider is denied. ®. 111, at ¶ 10.) Having no right to intervene, however, Stoller has no right to file a motion to suspend ongoing proceedings. Stoller has not identified-and this Court is not aware of-any procedural mechanism by which a non-party may file a motion to suspend ongoing proceedings without intervening therein.

1. The Court notes that despite the fact that the Bankruptcy Court approved the sale of Central and Rentamark's stocks and assets to the SPTA on August 8, 2007, and all stock and assets in Central and Rentamark were transferred to the SPTA on August 20, 2007, Google did not bring this information to the Court's attention until September 09, 2009, when it made a mere passing reference to the SPTA's acquisition of Central and Rentamark. It was not until September 30, 2009, when it filed its position paper in response to the Court's request for additional information pursuant to the Seventh Circuit's mandate that Google provided the Court with additional information regarding the status of Stoller's bankruptcy proceedings and the transfer of Central's and Rentamark's stocks and assets to the SPTA. 2. The Court notes that Central's and Rentamark's dissolution does not prevent them from being subject to suit in
the present action. Under both Illinois and Delaware state law, a corporation can participate in litigation after being dissolved if the litigation was initiated before or within five years or three years, respectively, after dissolution. See 805 ILCS 5/12.80 (corporation can sue or be sued on claims brought before and up to five years post-dissolution); 8 Del. C. § 278 (corporation can sue or be sued on claims brought before and up to three years post dissolution.). Here, Google filed its Complaint against Central and Rentamark on January 19, 2007 and the corporate entities were dissolved in January and April 2008, respectively. Therefore, Central and Rentamark, although dissolved are still subject to suit in this case.

07C385 GOOGLE INC vs. CENTRAL MANUFACTURING INC et al

Page 3 of 4

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 134

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 25 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 4 4

07C385 GOOGLE INC vs. CENTRAL MANUFACTURING INC et al

Page 4 of 4

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 135

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 26 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 1 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 Eastern Division Google Inc Plaintiff, v. Central Mfg. Inc., et al. Defendant. Case No.: 1:07-cv-00385 Honorable Virginia M. Kendall

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, October 16, 2009: MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Enter Permanent Injunction and Final judgment. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice(jms, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please refer to it for additional information. For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 136

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 27 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 1 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

GOOGLE INC., Plaintiff, vs. CENTRAL MFG. INC. a/k/a CENTRAL MFG. CO., a/k/a CENTRAL MFG. CO. (INC.), a/k/a CENTRAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. and a/k/a CENTRAL MFG. CO. OF ILLINOIS; STEALTH INDUSTRIES, INC. a/k/a RENTAMARK and a/k/a RENTAMARK.COM; and LEO D. STOLLER a/k/a LEO REICH, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 07 CV 385 Hon. Virginia M. Kendall

PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANTS CENTRAL MFG. INC. AND STEALTH INDUSTRIES, INC.

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 136

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 28 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 2 6

This Stipulated Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment is entered into, on the one hand, by Plaintiff Google Inc. ("Google") and, on the other hand, by Defendant Central Mfg. Inc., also known without limitation as Central Mfg. Co., Central Mfg. Co. (Inc.), Central Manufacturing Company, Inc. and/or Central Mfg. Co. of Illinois (collectively, "Central Mfg."), and Defendant Stealth Industries, Inc. ("Stealth") (collectively, Central Mfg. and Stealth are the "Entity Defendants"). The parties having stipulated to the entry of the following Stipulated Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment, and good cause appearing for the entry thereof: 1. Pursuant to the Assignment attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and as approved by Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois, The Society for the Prevention of Trademark Abuse, LLC, a limited liability company organized under the laws of Delaware (hereinafter The Society), has acquired all right, title and interest in the stock and all other assets, including any and all trademark rights, held by the Entity Defendants. The Sale of the Assets to the Purchaser was free and clear of all liens and all other claims whatsoever pursuant to Section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code, whether known or unknown, including, but not limited to, liens and claims of any of the Debtor's creditors, vendors, suppliers, employees or lessors, and The Society is not liable in any way (as a successor to the Debtor or otherwise) for any claims that any of the foregoing or any other third party may have against the Debtor or the Assets. Any and all alleged liens and claims on the Assets were transferred, affixed, and attached to the proceeds of the Sale, with the same validity, priority, force, and effect as such liens had been upon such property immediately prior to the Closing. Debtor or any person or entity acting in concert with the debtor were and continue to be enjoined from asserting any right, title, interest or claim in the assets following consummation of the sale by the trustee. 2. Leo Stoller was discharged as an officer or representative in any capacity of the Entity Defendants on August 20, 2007. Lance G. Johnson became the President of the Entity Defendants and oversaw the dissolution of the incorporated Entity Defendants by April 2008. All assets and claims for each of the Entity Defendants have been assigned to The Society. The Society thus stands as a successor in interest to any claims available to any of the Entity Defendants. 3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338, 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) and principles of supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), as well as personal jurisdiction over the Entity Defendants.

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 136

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 29 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 3 6

4. The Entity Defendants have been duly served with the summons and Complaint in this matter. If service is required in The Society, The Society hereby waives service and acknowledges receipt of the Complaint in this matter. 5. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff Google, and against each of the Entity Defendants and The Society, on Plaintiff Google's claims for false advertising in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B), for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. and for unfair competition. 6. The Entity Defendants and The Society admit each and every fact alleged in the Complaint. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, each of the Entity Defendants and The Society admit and represent: (a) None of the Entity Defendants or The Society has or has had any right, title or interest of any kind in the GOOGLE mark or in any mark, trade name or designation that is confusingly similar or dilutes to the GOOGLE mark; (b) None of the Entity Defendants or The Society has or has had any right or lawful ability to license, or offer for licensing, the GOOGLE mark, or any mark or designation that is confusingly similar to or dilutes the GOOGLE mark, in connection with any goods, services or commercial activities; and (c) None of the Entity Defendants or The Society has or has had any right or lawful ability to hold themselves out as or to identify themselves as any business entity of any kind using, in whole or in part and regardless of what other terms may be included, the GOOGLE mark, or any mark or designation that is confusingly similar to or dilutes, the GOOGLE mark, including without limitation any of the following: "GOOGLE," "GOOGLETM BRAND TRADEMARK LICENSING," "GOOGLE LICENSING" and/or "GOOGLE BRAND PRODUCTS & SERVICES." 7. Each of the Entity Defendants and The Society, as well as their officers, directors, principals, agents, servants, employees, successors, assigns, parents, subsidiaries and affiliates and all those acting on their behalf or in concert or participation with them, shall be and hereby are, effective immediately, permanently enjoined from engaging in any of the following acts:

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 136

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 30 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 4 6

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

claiming in any advertising, promotion or other materials, including without limitation on any web site, any right, title or interest in GOOGLE, whether in whole or in part and regardless of what other terms may be included, or in any mark, trade name, term, word or designation that is confusingly similar to or dilutes the GOOGLE mark; instituting, filing or maintaining, or threatening to institute, file or maintain, any application, registration, suit, action, proceeding or any other matter with any Court, with the United States Trademark Office, with the United States Trademark Trial and Appeal Board or with any other judicial or administrative body that asserts any right, title or interest in GOOGLE, whether in whole or in part and regardless of what other terms may be included, or in any mark, trade name, term, word or designation that is confusingly similar to or dilutes the GOOGLE mark; holding themselves out as or identifying themselves in any manner as any business entity of any kind using, whether in whole or in part and regardless of what other terms may be included, the GOOGLE mark or any mark, trade name, term, word or designation that is confusingly similar to or dilutes the GOOGLE mark, including without limitation any of the following: "GOOGLE," "GOOGLETM BRAND TRADEMARK LICENSING," "GOOGLE LICENSING" and/or "GOOGLE BRAND PRODUCTS & SERVICES"; licensing, offering to license, assigning or offering to assign or claiming the ability to license or assign any mark, term, word or designation that embodies, incorporates or uses, in whole or in part and regardless of what other terms may be included, the GOOGLE mark or any mark or designation that is confusingly similar to or dilutes the GOOGLE mark; interfering with, including without limitation by demanding in any manner any payment or other consideration of any kind for, Plaintiff's use, whether past, current or future, of any mark, name or designation embodying, incorporating or using, in whole or in part and regardless of what other terms may be included, Plaintiff's GOOGLE mark; using the GOOGLE mark, whether in whole or in part and regardless of what other terms may be included, or any mark, trade name, term, word or

CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385 Document 136

Filed 10/20/2009 Page 31 of 45 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 5 6

designation that is confusingly similar to or dilutes the GOOGLE mark, in connection with the sale, offering for sale, licensing, offering for license, importation, transfer, distribution, display, marketing, advertisement or promotion of any goods, services or commercial activity of any Defendant; (g) engaging in acts of unfair competition or passing off with respect to Plaintiff Google; (h) assisting, aiding or abetting any other person or entity in engaging in or performing any of the activities referred to in subparagraphs (a) through (g) above. 8. Each party to this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment shall bear its respective attorney's fees, costs and expenses incurred in this action. 9. The Entity Defendants and The Society hereby waive any further findings of fact and conclusions of law in connection with this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment and all right to appeal therefrom. It is the intention of the parties hereto that this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment be afforded full collateral estoppel and res judicata effect as against the Entity Defendants and The Society and shall be enforceable as such. The Entity Defendants and The Society further hereby waive in this proceeding, including without limitation in any proceedings brought to enforce and/or interpret this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment, and in any future proceedings between the parties any and all defenses and/or claims that could have been asserted by the Entity Defendants or The Society against Plaintiff, including without limitation any and all defenses, claims or contentions that Plaintiff's GOOGLE mark is invalid and/or unenforceable and/or that any person or entity other than Plaintiff has superior rights to the GOOGLE mark. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in the event that Plaintiff brings any proceeding to enforce this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment, no Entity Defendant or The Society shall be entitled to assert, and each Entity Defendant and The Society hereby waives any right to assert, any defense or contention other than that he or it has complied or substantially complied in good faith with the terms of this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment. 10. Nothing in this Judgment is intended to waive, limit or modify in any manner, and shall not be construed to waive, limit or modify, Google's claims, rights or remedies against Leo Stoller, including without limitation for his acts and/or omissions as an officer, director, shareholder, representative or agent of Defendants, or against other person or entity other than

Document 136 CCsee 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 aas 1:07-cv-00385

Filed 10/16/2009 Page 6 6 Filed 10/20/2009 Page 32 of 45

Central Mfg. and Stealth in connection with this action or otherwise. 11. This Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing and/or interpreting this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment to determine any issues which may arise concerning this Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment. IT IS SO STIPULATED. DATED: September __, 2009 GOOGLE INC. By:_________________________________ One of Its Attorneys Michael T. Zeller (ARDC No. 6226433) QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP 865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017 Tel.: [phone]/Fax: [phone]

DATED: September 22, 2009

CENTRAL MFG. INC., STEALTH INDUSTRIES, INC. and THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE, LLC By:_________________________________ Lance G. Johnson Director, The Society for the Prevention of Trademark Abuses, LLC President, Central Mfg. Inc. President, Stealth Industries, Inc. c/o Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP 1300 19th Street, NW Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: [phone]/Fax: [phone]

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 16, 2009

________________________________________ United States District Judge

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 1 of 13 Page 33 of 45

APPEAL, COLE, REOPEN, TERMED

United States District Court Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 (Chicago) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:07-cv-00385 Internal Use Only

Google Inc v. Central Mfg. Inc. et al Assigned to: Honorable Virginia M. Kendall Case in other court: 07-01612 07-01651 Cause: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act Plaintiff Google Inc

Date Filed: 01/19/2007 Date Terminated: 10/16/2009 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 470 Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction: Federal Question represented by Michael Thomas Zeller Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Oliver, LLP 865 South Figueroa Street 10th Floor Los Angeles , CA 90017 [phone] Email: [e-mail] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jonathan M. Cyrluk Stetler & Duffy, Ltd. 11 South LaSalle Street Suite 1200 Chicago , IL 60603-1203 [phone] Email: [e-mail] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William John Barrett Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP 200 West Madison Suite 3900 Chicago , IL 60606 [phone] Email: [e-mail] TERMINATED: 05/15/2008

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 2 of 13 Page 34 of 45

V. Defendant Central Mfg. Inc. also known as Central Mfg Co also known as Central Mfg Co. (Inc.) also known as Central Manufacturing Company, Inc. also known as Central Mfg. Co. of Illinois Defendant Stealth Industries, Inc. also known as Rentamark also known as Rentamark.Com Defendant Central Mfg. Inc. and Stealth Industries, by and through Richard M. Fogel, not individually but as Chapter 7 Trustee Defendant The Society for the Prevention of Trademark Abuse, LLC as successor in interest to Central Mfg. Inc and Stealth Industries, Inc. represented by Lance G. Johnson Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP 1300 19th Street, NW Suite 600 Washington , DC 20036 202 659 9076 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP

V. Movant Leo Stoller represented by Leo Stoller 7115 W. North Avenue Oak Park, IL 60302 [phone] PRO SE

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 3 of 13 Page 35 of 45

V. Trustee Richard M. Fogel, not individually, but as chapter 7 trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Leo Stoller

Date Filed 01/19/2007 01/19/2007 01/19/2007 01/19/2007 01/19/2007 01/19/2007

# 1 2 3 4 5 6

Docket Text COMPLAINT filed by Google Inc; (eav, ) (Entered: 01/22/2007) CIVIL Cover Sheet (eav, ) (Entered: 01/22/2007) ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Google Inc by Michael Thomas Zeller (eav, ) (Entered: 01/22/2007) ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Google Inc by William John Barrett (eav, ) (Entered: 01/22/2007) NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Google Inc (eav, ) (Entered: 01/22/2007) (Court only) RECEIPT regarding payment of filing fee paid on 1/19/2007 in the amount of $350.00, receipt number 10337772 (eav, ) (Entered: 01/22/2007) SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Central Mfg. Inc. (eav, ) (Entered: 01/22/2007) MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc. to interplead (Exhibits) (eav, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 1/31/2007 (eav, ). (Entered: 01/31/2007) MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc. to suspend pending the Appeal to lift the automatic stay for Google to sue the debtor Leo Stoller (Exhibits) (eav, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007) MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc. to suspend pending the Trademark trial and Appeal Board's decision on the defendant's motion for summary judgment (eav, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007) MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc. to suspend (eav, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007) NOTICE of Motion by Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc. for presentment of motion to Interplead 9 , motion to Suspend 10 , motion to Suspend pending Appeal to lift automatic stay for Google to sue the Debtor, Leo Stoller, and 11 , motion to suspend pending the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's Decision on the defendant's motion for summary judgment 8 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 2/5/2007 at 9:00 AM. (eav, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007)

01/19/2007 01/30/2007

7 8

01/30/2007

9

01/30/2007

10

01/30/2007 01/30/2007

11 12

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 4 of 13 Page 36 of 45

01/30/2007 02/05/2007

13 15

PRO SE Appearance by Leo Stolla (eav, ) (Entered: 02/01/2007) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :Motion hearing held. Motion to interplead 8 ; Motion to suspend pending the Appeal to lift the automatic stay for Google to sue the debtor Leo Stoller 9 ; Motion to suspend pending the Trademark trial and Appeal Board's decision on the defendant's motion for summary judgment 10 ; and Motion to suspend 11 are entered and continued to 2/20/2007 at 9:00 AM. Responses due by 2/12/2007. No replies are necessary.Mailed notice (gmr, ) (Entered: 02/06/2007) SUMMONS Returned Executed by Google Inc as to Stealth Industries, Inc. on 1/23/2007, answer due 2/12/2007; Central Mfg. Inc. on 1/23/2007, answer due 2/12/2007. (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/06/2007) MOTION by Leo Stolla to intervene (eav, ) (Entered: 02/07/2007) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stolla for motion to intervene 16 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 2/12/2007 at 9:00 AM. (eav, ) (Entered: 02/07/2007) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :Motion to intervene 16 is entered and continued to 2/20/2007 at 09:00 AM. Any response shall be filed by 2/12/2007. No reply is necessary. The presentment date of 2/12/2007 for said motion is hereby stricken.Mailed notice (gmr, ) (Entered: 02/07/2007) RESPONSE by Richard M. Fogel, not individually, but as chapter 7 trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Leo Stollerin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.suspend 10 , MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.interplead 8 , MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.to suspend 9 , MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.to suspend 11 , MOTION by Plaintiff Leo Stolla to intervene 16 and Joinder to Responses of Google Inc. (Alwin, Janice) (Entered: 02/12/2007) RESPONSE by Google Incin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.interplead 8 , MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.to suspend 9 , MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.to suspend 11 , MOTION by Plaintiff Leo Stolla to intervene 16 (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/12/2007) RESPONSE by Google Incin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Stealth Industries, Inc., Central Mfg. Inc.suspend 10 (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/12/2007) DECLARATION of Michael T. Zeller regarding response in opposition to motion 21 , response in opposition to motion, 20 by Google Inc (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1# 2 Exhibit 2# 3 Exhibit 3# 4 Exhibit 4# 5 Exhibit 5# 6 Exhibit 6# 7 Exhibit 7# 8 Exhibit 8# 9 Exhibit 9# 10 Exhibit 10# 11 Exhibit 11# 12 Exhibit 12# 13 Exhibit 13# 14 Exhibit 14# 15 Exhibit 15# 16 Exhibit 16# 17 Exhibit 17# 18 Exhibit 18# 19 Exhibit 19# 20 Exhibit 20# 21 Exhibit 21# 22 Exhibit 22# 23 Exhibit 23# 24 Exhibit 24# 25 Exhibit 25# 26 Exhibit 26# 27 Exhibit 27# 28 Exhibit 28# 29 Exhibit 29# 30 Exhibit 30)(Barrett, William)

02/06/2007

14

02/06/2007 02/06/2007

16 17

02/07/2007

18

02/12/2007

19

02/12/2007

20

02/12/2007

21

02/12/2007

22

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 5 of 13 Page 37 of 45

(Entered: 02/12/2007) 02/12/2007 23 MOTION by Plaintiff Google Inc for permanent injunction (Stipulated), MOTION by Plaintiff Google Inc for judgment (Final) (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/12/2007) NOTICE of Motion by William John Barrett for presentment of motion for permanent injunction, motion for judgment 23 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 2/20/2007 at 09:00 AM. (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/12/2007) SUPPLEMENT by Google Inc to declaration,, 22 Supplemental Declaration of Michael T. Zeller (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/13/2007) CERTIFICATE by Google Inc of Service of the Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment as to Defendants Central Mfg. Inc. and Stealth Industries, Inc. (Proposed Order) (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/13/2007) MEMORANDUM by Google Inc in support of motion for permanent injunction, motion for judgment 23 Google Inc.'s Separate Memorandum in Support of Joint Motion for Entry of Stipulated Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment (Barrett, William) (Entered: 02/13/2007) Notice of Filing Supplemental Authority by Leo Stolla ; Notice of filing (eav, ) (Entered: 02/20/2007) OBJECTION by Leo Stoller to Joint Moiton for Entry of Stipulated Permanent Inj8unction and Final Judgment; Notice of filing (Exhibits) (eav, ) (Entered: 02/21/2007) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :Motion hearing held. All pending motions are taken under advisement, with a ruling by mail. Status hearing set for 3/13/2007 at 09:00 AM.Mailed notice (gmr, ) (Entered: 02/20/2007) REPLY by Defendant Leo Stolla to Trustee's Ominibus response in opposition to motions of debtor Leo Stoller to: (1) Intevene; (II) Interplead; (III) Suspend proceeding for sixty days to retain counsel, for defendants; (IV) Suspend pending appeal to lift automactic stay for Google to sue the debtor; and (V) Suspend pending trademark trial and appeal Board's decision for defendants' motion for summary judgment and joinder of responses by Google, Inc.; Notice of filing (eav, ) (Entered: 02/26/2007) MOTION by Defendant Leo Stolla to dismiss for failure to join a party under Rule F.R.C.P. 19 (eav, ) (Entered: 03/05/2007) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stolla for presentment of motion to dismiss 32 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 3/7/2007 at 09:00 AM. (eav, ) (Entered: 03/05/2007) REPLY by Defendant Leo Stolla to Google Inc.'s combined opposition to debtor Leo Stoller's motions (1) to intervene, (2) to interplead, (3) to suspend for sixty days to retain counsel for defendants and (4) to suspend pending appeal to lift automatic stay for Google to sue the debtor ; Notice of filing (eav, ) (Entered: 03/06/2007)

02/12/2007

24

02/13/2007 02/13/2007

25 26

02/13/2007

27

02/15/2007 02/16/2007

28 30

02/20/2007

29

02/22/2007

31

03/02/2007 03/02/2007

32 33

03/02/2007

35

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 6 of 13 Page 38 of 45

03/02/2007

36

REPLY by Movant Leo Stoller to Google Inc.'s opposition to debtor Leo Stoller's motion to suspend pending the trademark trial and appeal board's decision on defendant's motion for summary judgment 21 (Exhibits); Notice. (smm) (Entered: 03/08/2007) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :On March 2, 2007, Leo Stoller ("Stoller") filed a Motion to Dismiss for failure to join a party -himself -- pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 19. Stoller previously filed a motion to intervene in this action on February 6, 2007. The Court has not yet ruled upon that motion. As such, Stoller remains a non-party and lacks standing to file a motion pursuant to Rule 19. See Arrow v. Gambler's Supply, Inc., 55 F.3d 407, 409 (8th Cir. 1995) ("only a party may make a Rule 19 motion") (citing Thompson v. Boggs, 33 F.3d 847, 858 n. 10 (7th Cir. 1994) (noting lack of any precedent for granting a non-party's motion for joinder)). Accordingly, Stoller's Motion to Dismiss 32 is stricken and the parties need not appear on March 7, 2007.Mailed notice (gmr, ) (Entered: 03/05/2007) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :For the reasons set out in the Memorandum Opinion and Order, Motion to intervene 16 is denied; Motion to interplead 8 is denied; and Motions to suspend 9 , 10 , 11 are denied.Mailed notice (eav, ) (Entered: 03/13/2007) MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by Judge Virginia M. Kendall on 3/12/2007:Mailed notice(eav, ) (Entered: 03/13/2007) NOTICE of appeal by Leo Stoller regarding orders 37 , 38 ; Notice of Filing (Fee Due) (dj, ) (Entered: 03/15/2007) TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on 3/15/07 notice of appeal 39 . Notified counsel (dj, ) (Entered: 03/15/2007) MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (eav, ) Modified on 5/4/2007 (tg, ). (Entered: 03/16/2007) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stoller for presentment of motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis 41 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 3/19/2007 at 09:00 AM. (eav, ) Modified on 5/4/2007 (tg, ). (Entered: 03/16/2007) MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller under FRCP 59 and/or 60 (Exhibits) (eav, ) (Entered: 03/16/2007) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stoller for presentment of under FRCP 59 and/or 60 43 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 3/19/2007 at 09:00 AM. (eav, ) (Entered: 03/16/2007) NOTICE by Leo Stoller of filing motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis 41 (eav, ) (Entered: 03/16/2007) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal 39 ; USCA Case No. 07-1569. (smm) (Entered: 03/20/2007) CIRCUIT Rule 3(b) Notice. (smm) (Entered: 03/20/2007)

03/05/2007

34

03/12/2007

37

03/12/2007 03/13/2007 03/15/2007 03/15/2007 03/15/2007

38 39 40 41 42

03/15/2007 03/15/2007

43 44

03/15/2007 03/15/2007 03/15/2007

45 54 55

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 7 of 13 Page 39 of 45

03/15/2007

57

MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :Joint motion for entry of stipulated permanent injunction and final judgment 23 is granted. Enter permanent injunction and final judgment as to defendants Central Mfg., Inc. and Stealth Industries, Inc.Mailed notice Civil case terminated (eav, ) (Entered: 03/20/2007) PERMANENT INJUNCTION and Final Judgment as to defendants Central Mfg., Inc. and Stealth Industries, Inc. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Kendall on 3/15/2007:Mailed notice(eav, ) (Entered: 03/20/2007) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :For the reasons stated below, Movant Stoller's motion to reconsider 43 is denied. The presentment date of 3/19/2007 for said motion is hereby stricken.Mailed notice (gmr, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 3/16/2007 (gmr, ). (Entered: 03/16/2007) RESPONSE by Google Incin Opposition to MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller for leave to appeal in forma pauperis 41 (Barrett, William) (Entered: 03/16/2007) NOTICE by Google Inc re response in opposition to motion 47 Notice of Filing (Barrett, William) (Entered: 03/16/2007) DECLARATION of Michael T. Zeller regarding response in opposition to motion 47 by Google Inc (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-G# 2 Exhibit H-J) (Barrett, William) (Entered: 03/16/2007) NOTICE by Google Inc re declaration 49 Notice of Filing (Barrett, William) (Entered: 03/16/2007) SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE of appeal by Leo Stoller regarding orders 46 , 34 ;(Fee Due) (dj, ) (Entered: 03/20/2007) DESIGNATION by Leo Stoller of the content of the record on appeal : USCA Case No. 07-1569 (dj, ) (Entered: 03/20/2007) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :Motion hearing held on 3/19/2007. For the reasons stated on the record in open court, movant Stoller's motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis 41 is granted.Mailed notice (eav, ) (Entered: 03/20/2007) REPLY by Movant Leo Stoller to Google's opposition to motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis (eav, ) Modified on 5/17/2007 (vcf, ). (Entered: 03/22/2007) TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on 3/20/07 notice of appeal 51 . Notified counsel (dj, ) (Entered: 03/20/2007) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal 39 ; USCA Case No. 07-1612. (rp, ) (Entered: 03/23/2007) CIRCUIT Rule 3(b) Notice. (rp, ) (Entered: 03/23/2007) TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following dates: 2/5/07, 3/13/07 and 3/19/07; Before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall (3 volumes) (eav, ) (Entered: 03/22/2007)

03/15/2007

58

03/16/2007

46

03/16/2007

47

03/16/2007 03/16/2007

48 49

03/16/2007 03/19/2007 03/19/2007 03/19/2007

50 51 52 56

03/19/2007

60

03/20/2007 03/20/2007 03/20/2007 03/21/2007

53 61 62 59

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 8 of 13 Page 40 of 45

03/21/2007 03/23/2007 03/23/2007 03/23/2007 03/27/2007 03/27/2007

63 64 65 66 67 68

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE of appeal by Leo Stoller regarding orders 58 , 57 ; (Fee Due) (dj, ). (Entered: 03/23/2007) TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on 3/23/07 notice of appeal 63 . Notified counsel (dj, ) (Entered: 03/23/2007) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal 63 ; USCA Case No. 07-1651. (smm) (Entered: 03/27/2007) CIRCUIT Rule 3(b) Notice. (smm) (Entered: 03/27/2007) DESIGNATION of the content by Leo Stoller of record on appeal : USCA Case No. 07-1651 (dj, ) (Entered: 03/28/2007) COPIES of TRANSCRIPTS of the hearing before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on March 13, 2007, 2) Transcript of the hearing before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on March 19, 2007 and 3) Transcript of the hearing before the Honorable Jack B. Schmetterer on March 1, 2007 by Leo Stoller; Notice. (td, ) (Entered: 03/29/2007) DESIGNATION by Leo Stoller of Additional Content of the Record on Appeal. (rp, ) (Entered: 03/30/2007) DESIGNATION by Leo Stoller of additional content of the record on appeal 46 : USCA Case No. 07-1651 (hp, ) (Entered: 04/12/2007) TRANSMITTED to the USCA for the 7th Circuit the long record on appeal 51 , 39 , 63 (USCA no. 07-1569, 07-1612 and 07-1651) consisting of 1 volume of pleadings, 2 loose pleadings and 3 transcripts. (dj, ) (Entered: 04/12/2007) TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following dates: 02/20/07 before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall. (ar, ) (Entered: 04/13/2007) USCA RECEIVED on 4/12/07 the long record regarding notice of appeal 51 , 39 , 63 ; (07-1569, 07-1612 and 07-1651) (dj, ) (Entered: 04/17/2007) TRANSMITTED to the USCA for the 7th Circuit supplemental record on appeal, 51 39 and 63 , (USCA nos. 07-1569, 07-1612, and 07-1651) consisting of one transcript 72 . Mailed copies of USCA transmittal letter and certificate to counsel of record. (ar, ) (Entered: 04/13/2007) MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller for leave to file designation of supplemental content of record on appeal. (smm) (Entered: 05/11/2007) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stoller for presentment of motion for leave to file designation of supplemental content of record on appeal 75 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 5/14/2007 at 9:00 A.M. (smm) (Entered: 05/11/2007) DESIGNATION of supplemental content of record on appeal by Leo Stoller; Notice. (smm) (Entered: 05/16/2007) RESPONSE by Google Incin Opposition to MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller for leave to file 75 (Barrett, William) (Entered: 05/11/2007)

03/28/2007 04/10/2007 04/12/2007

69 70 71

04/12/2007 04/12/2007 04/13/2007

72 74 73

05/10/2007 05/10/2007

75 76

05/10/2007 05/11/2007

79 77

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 9 of 13 Page 41 of 45

05/14/2007

78

MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall :Motion for leave to file designation of supplemental content of record on appeal 75 is denied as moot.Mailed notice (gmr, ) (Entered: 05/14/2007) DESIGNATION of additional content of the record on appeal by Leo Stoller (Exhibit); Notice. (smm) (Entered: 05/18/2007) DESIGNATION of supplemental content of record on appeal by Leo Stoller (Exhibits); Notice. (smm) (Entered: 05/18/2007) NOTICE by William John Barrett of Change of Address (Barrett, William) (Entered: 05/31/2007) CERTIFIED copy of order dated 8/7/2007 from the 7th Circuit regarding notice of appeal 51 , notice of appeal 39 , notice of appeal 63 ; Appellate case no. : 07-1569, 07-1612, 07-1651 It is ordered that the #1 and #3 are Denied. It is further Ordered that Stoller is fined $10,000, payable to the Clerk of this Court. If this fine is not paid within 14 days, we will enter an order under Support Systems, Int'l, Inc. v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1995), directing the clerks of all the federal courts in this circuit to return unfiled any papers submitted either directly or indirectly by or on behalf of Stoller unless and until he pays in full the sanction that has been imposed against him. (rp, ) (Entered: 08/13/2007) LETTER from the USCA retaining the record on appeal in USCA no. 071569, 07-1612, 07-1651 consisting of one volume of pleadings, two volumes of loose pleadings and four volumes of transcripts. (kjc, ) (Entered: 04/28/2008) MANDATE of USCA dated 4/2/2008 regarding notice of appeal 51 , notice of appeal 39 , notice of appeal 63 ; USCA No. 07-1569, 07-1612, 07-1651 ; The ruling on the motions to intervene and the final judgment Vacated and the case Remanded for further proceedings, in accordance with the decision of this court entered on this date. (kjc, ) (Entered: 04/28/2008) OPINION from the USCA for the 7th Circuit; Argued 4/2/2008; Decided 4/2/2008 in USCA case no. 07-1569, 07-1612 & 07-1651. (kjc, ) (Entered: 04/28/2008) MINUTE entry before Judge Virginia M. Kendall: Status hearing set for 5/15/2008 at 09:00 AM. Mailed notice. (kw, ) (Entered: 05/02/2008) MOTION to withdraw as attorney for Plaintiff, Google, Inc. (Barrett, William) (Entered: 05/12/2008) NOTICE of Motion by William John Barrett for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney 88 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 5/15/2008 at 09:00 AM. (Barrett, William) (Entered: 05/12/2008) ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Google Inc by Jonathan M. Cyrluk (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 05/14/2008) MOTION by Plaintiff Google Inc to substitute attorney, MOTION by counsel for Plaintiff Google Inc to withdraw as attorney (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered:

05/16/2007 05/16/2007 05/31/2007 08/08/2007

80 81 82 83

04/24/2008

84

04/24/2008

85

04/24/2008

86

05/02/2008 05/12/2008 05/12/2008

87 88 89

05/14/2008 05/14/2008

90 91

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 10 of 13 Page 42 of 45

05/14/2008) 05/14/2008 92 NOTICE of Motion by Jonathan M. Cyrluk for presentment of motion to substitute attorney, motion to withdraw as attorney 91 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 5/20/2008 at 09:00 AM. (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 05/14/2008) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: Status hearing held. Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw Attorney William J. Barrett 88 and to Substitute Jonathan M. Cyrluk as Local Counsel 91 are granted. The Motion to Intervene is reinstated. Plaintiff to supplement the Motion by 6/9/2008; response due 6/30/2008; reply due 7/7/2008. Defendant must pay the fine as ordered by the 7th Circuit by 6/9/2008 or this case will be dismissed. Mailed notice. (kw, ) Modified on 5/23/2008 (kw, ). (Entered: 05/16/2008) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: Minute entry 93 is amended to reflect that the Defendant must pay his fine prior to the filing of any papers in this case. In all other respects the minute entry stands. Mailed notice. (kw, ) (Entered: 05/16/2008) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: It has been brought to the Court's attention that electronic notice of minute entry 93 was not distributed. The Court hereby brings notice to all parties of the filing of minute order 93 . Paper copies of minute entries 93 and 94 will be mailed to all parties. Mailed notice. (kw, ) (Entered: 05/23/2008) MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller to Suspend; Notice.( Exhibits)(Poor Quality Original - Paper Document on File)(vcf, ) (Entered: 06/09/2008) LETTER from the Seventh Circuit returning the record on appeal in USCA no. 07-1569, 07-1612, 07-1651 consisting of one volume of pleadings, two volumes of loose pleadings and four volumes of transcripts. (kjc, ) (Entered: 06/06/2008) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: Mr. Stoller is advised that all motions shall be presented to the court pursuant to Local Rule 5.3(a and b). Failure to comply with this rule may result in the striking of the motion. A copy of Local Rule 5.3 (a and b) was mailed to Mr. Stoller along with a copy of this order by the court's clerk.Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 06/18/2008) MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller to suspend. (vcf, ) (Entered: 06/26/2008) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stoller for presentment of motion to suspend 99 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 6/30/2007 at 09:00 AM. (vcf, ) (Entered: 06/26/2008) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Motion hearing held. Plaintiff's motion to suspend 99 is entered and continued pending ruling on the pending motion.Advised in open court (jms, ) (Entered: 06/30/2008) RESPONSE by Plaintiff Google Inc to motion to intervene 16 (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Michael T. Zeller, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3) (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 06/30/2008)

05/15/2008

93

05/16/2008

94

05/23/2008

95

06/03/2008 06/04/2008

97 96

06/18/2008

98

06/25/2008 06/25/2008

99 100

06/30/2008

101

06/30/2008

102

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 11 of 13 Page 43 of 45

07/11/2008 07/11/2008

103 104

MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller to file reply instanter. (Attachments: # 1 Response)(vcf, ) (Entered: 07/14/2008) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stoller for presentment of motion to file reply instanter 103 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 7/17/2008 at 09:00 AM. (vcf, ) (Entered: 07/14/2008) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Mr. Stoller's motion to file reply instanter 103 is granted. Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 07/14/2008) REPLY by Leo Stoller to Google's response to supplement to motion to intervene 16 . (vcf, ) (Entered: 07/15/2008) (Court only) ***Motions terminated: MOTION by Plaintiff Leo Stolla to intervene 16 see order dated 3-12-07 [#37] (jms, ) (Entered: 01/30/2009)

07/14/2008

105

07/14/2008 01/30/2009 03/31/2009

106

107

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Stollers Motion to Suspend [97, 99 is denied without prejudice. For further details see attached minute order.Mailed notice (tlp, ) (Entered: 03/31/2009) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Movant Stollers motion to suspend is denied without prejudice. Movant Stoller may refile the motion if this Court allows him to intervene on remand.Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 06/30/2009) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: Stollers motion to Iniervene is denied. The parties are directed to submit position papers regarding the extent to which Stollers corporations are subject to suit and when this case arose and as such the propriety of the involvement of the bankruptcy estate. The parties must submit such position papers by 9/9/2009.Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 08/17/2009) MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 8/17/2009:Mailed notice(jms, ) (Entered: 08/17/2009) MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller for reconsideration regarding its opinion dated August 17, 2009 109 (Exhibit) (hp, ) (Entered: 08/24/2009) NOTICE of Motion by Leo Stoller for presentment of motion for reconsideration 111 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 8/27/2009 at 09:00 AM. (hp, ) (Entered: 08/24/2009) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Mr. Stoller's motion for reconsideration 111 is taken under advisement. Response is to be filed by 9/9/2009. Reply is to be filed by 9/16/2009. Mr. Stoller's motion for an extension of time to file his position brief pursuant to this court's order of 8/17/2009 111 is granted in part. The parties are given to 9/30/2009 to file their position briefs on the extent to which Stollers corporations are subject to suit and when this case arose and as such the propriety of the involvement of the bankruptcy estate. Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 08/25/2009) (Court only) ***Deadline terminated. (hp, ) (Entered: 08/26/2009)

06/30/2009

108

08/17/2009

109

08/17/2009 08/24/2009 08/24/2009

110 111 112

08/25/2009

113

08/25/2009

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 12 of 13 Page 44 of 45

09/09/2009

114

RESPONSE by Google Incin Opposition to MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller for reconsideration regarding terminate motions, 109 111 Google Inc.'s Response to Motion for Reconsideration (Zeller, Michael) (Entered: 09/09/2009) AFFIDAVIT by Plaintiff Google Inc in Opposition to MOTION by Movant Leo Stoller for reconsideration regarding terminate motions, 109 111 Declaration of Michael T. Zeller In Support of Google's Response to Motion for Reconsideration (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1)(Zeller, Michael) (Entered: 09/09/2009) REPLY by Leo Stoller to Google's response to motion for reconsideration 114 (Exhibits); Notice. (smm) (Entered: 09/16/2009) EXHIBIT C by Movant Leo Stoller regarding reply to Google's response to motion for reconsideration 116 , (Attachment(s): #(1) Continuation of Exhibit C) 114 . (smm) Modified on 9/16/2009 (smm). (Entered: 09/16/2009) EXHIBIT D by Movant Leo Stoller regarding reply to Google's response to motion for reconsideration 116 , 114 . (smm) (Entered: 09/16/2009) EXHIBIT E by Movant Leo Stoller regarding reply to Google's response to motion for reconsideration 116 , 114 (Attachments: #(1) Continuation of Exhibit E).( Poor Quality Original - Paper Document on File.)(smm) (Entered: 09/16/2009) EXHIBIT F by Movant Leo Stoller regarding reply to Google's response to motion for reconsideration 116 , 114 .( Poor Quality Original - Paper Document on File.) (smm) (Entered: 09/16/2009) MEMORANDUM by Google Inc (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 09/30/2009) DECLARATION of Michael T. Zeller regarding memorandum 121 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-19)(Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 09/30/2009) MOTION by Plaintiff Google Inc for judgment and entry of stipulated permanent injunction (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 09/30/2009) DECLARATION of Michael T. Zeller regarding motion for judgment 123 and entry of stipulated permanent injunction (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-7, # 2 Exhibit 8-17, # 3 Exhibit 18-26)(Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 09/30/2009) NOTICE of Motion by Jonathan M. Cyrluk for presentment of motion for judgment 123 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 10/13/2009 at 09:00 AM. (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 09/30/2009) CERTIFICATE of Service of permanent injunction by Jonathan M. Cyrluk on behalf of Google Inc (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 09/30/2009) POSITION brief by Leo Stoller;Notice. # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 1 contd) (vcf, ). ( Poor Quality Original - Paper Document on File.) (Entered: 10/02/2009) POSITION brief by Leo Stoller (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 5-7, # 2 Exhibit 78). ( Poor Quality Original - Paper Document on File.)(vcf, ) (Entered:

09/09/2009

115

09/14/2009 09/14/2009

116 117

09/14/2009 09/14/2009

118 119

09/14/2009

120

09/30/2009 09/30/2009 09/30/2009 09/30/2009

121 122 123 124

09/30/2009

125

09/30/2009 09/30/2009

126 128

09/30/2009

129

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois Case 1:07-cv-00385 Document 141 Filed 10/20/2009

Page 13 of 13 Page 45 of 45

10/02/2009) 10/01/2009 127 CERTIFIED copy of order dated 6/16/2009 from the USCA regarding notice of appeal 39 ; Appellate case no. : 07-1569, 07-1612 and 07-1651. The following is before the court: Notice of Sanction Payment, filed on June 3, 2008, by the pro se appellant. It is ordered that the court's order dated August 23,2007, imposing a filing bar in accordance with Mack, is Rescinded. Leo Stoller has paid the underlying sanction in full. The clerk of this court shall send a copy of this order to the clerks of all federal courts in this circuit. (vcf, ) (Entered: 10/02/2009) MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 50, receipt number 07520000000004155494. (Cyrluk, Jonathan) (Entered: 10/02/2009) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Motion by Jonathan Cyrluk to file the appearance of Lance Johnson as appear pro hac vice 130 is granted. Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 10/06/2009) RESPONSE by Leo Stoller to MOTION Google Inc for judgment and entry of stipulated permanent injunction 123 ;Notice. (vcf, ) (Entered: 10/09/2009) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Motion hearing held regarding motion for judgment 123 . Court will issue an order shortly. Advised in opn court (jms, ) (Entered: 10/16/2009) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Stollers motion for reconsideration 111 is denied.Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 10/16/2009) MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Enter Permanent Injunction and Final judgment. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 10/16/2009) PERMANENT INJUNCTION Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 10/16/2009:Mailed notice(jms, ) (Entered: 10/16/2009) NOTICE of appeal by Leo Stoller regarding orders 136 , 135 , 134 (ifp) (dj, ) (Entered: 10/20/2009) DESIGNATION by Leo Stoller of content of record on appeal. (dj, ) (Entered: 10/20/2009) NOTICE of granting in forma pauperis petition by Leo Stoller. (dj, ) (Entered: 10/20/2009) NOTICE of Appeal Due letter sent to counsel of record (dj, ) (Entered: 10/20/2009)

10/02/2009 10/06/2009

130 131

10/07/2009 10/13/2009

132 133

10/16/2009 10/16/2009

134 135

10/16/2009 10/19/2009 10/19/2009 10/19/2009 10/20/2009

136 137 138 139 140

https://ecf.ilnd.circ7.dcn/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?111625299174463-L_961_0-1

10/20/2009