LinkedIn Corporation v. Mantheos Pte. Ltd.
Filing
19
CONSENT JUDGMENT RE DOCKET NO. 17 . ***Civil Case Terminated.*** Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 5/9/2022. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/9/2022)
Case 4:22-cv-00651-HSG Document 19 Filed 05/09/22 Page 1 of 5
1 JONATHAN H. BLAVIN (State Bar No. 230269)
jonathan.blavin@mto.com
2 NICHOLAS D. FRAM (State Bar No. 288293)
Nicholas.Fram@mto.com
3 MICA L. MOORE (State Bar No. 321473)
Mica.Moore@mto.com
4 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
560 Mission Street
5 Twenty-Seventh Floor
San Francisco, California 94105-2907
6 Telephone:
(415) 512-4000
Facsimile:
(415) 512-4077
7
Attorneys for LinkedIn Corporation
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
LinkedIn Corporation,
12
13
Case No. 4:22-cv-00651-HSG
Plaintiff,
FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT
vs.
14
Mantheos Pte. Ltd., Jeremiah Tang, Yuxi
15 Chew, and Stan Kosyakov
16
Defendants.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT
Case 4:22-cv-00651-HSG Document 19 Filed 05/09/22 Page 2 of 5
1
FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT
2
WHEREAS, on February 1, 2022, LinkedIn filed a Complaint against Defendants
3 Mantheos Pte. Ltd., Jeremiah Tang, Yuxi Chew, and Stan Kosyakov (collectively, “Defendants”)
4 alleging that Defendants engaged in unlawful acts of breach of contract, fraud and deceit, and
5 misappropriation and violated the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
WHEREAS, LinkedIn alleges that Defendants gained unauthorized access to the
6
7
8
LinkedIn website and LinkedIn member profile data, extracted and copied data from millions of
LinkedIn member profile pages using an automated process known as “scraping,” and used
hundreds of fake LinkedIn member accounts and prepaid debit cards under fake names to
9 fraudulently obtain access to LinkedIn Sales Navigator;
10
WHEREAS, LinkedIn served Defendants with the Summons and Complaint on
11 February 3, 2022;
WHEREAS, Defendants have not filed an answer in this matter, but deny liability
12
13
for the actions alleged in the Complaint;
WHEREAS, Defendants consent to this Court’s jurisdiction over them for the
14
purposes of entry and enforcement of this Final Judgment on Consent;
15
WHEREAS, LinkedIn and Defendants (collectively, the “parties”) have reached an
16 agreement for resolution of the action; and
THEREFORE, Defendants consent and stipulate to judgment in favor of LinkedIn
17
18 and authorize the Court to enter judgment granting relief in favor of LinkedIn as follows:
Defendants, and all of their officers, directors, agents, servants, and employees, and
19
20
21
all persons in active concert or participation or in privity with any of them, ARE HEREBY
PERMANENTLY RESTRAINED AND BARRED from:
a.
Accessing or attempting to access or use LinkedIn’s website, computers, computer
22 systems, computer network, or computer programs (collectively, “LinkedIn’s Servers”), and data
23 stored therein (“LinkedIn Data”), through scraping, crawling, and/or the use of bots or other
24 automated technologies as described in ¶¶ 51–61 of the Complaint filed in this Action, or
25
-2FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT
Case 4:22-cv-00651-HSG Document 19 Filed 05/09/22 Page 3 of 5
1
otherwise in violation of LinkedIn’s User Agreement;
2
b.
Marketing, advertising, or otherwise making any statements or
3 representations to anyone regarding the scraping, inclusion or availability of LinkedIn member
4 data on Defendants’ website or through Defendants’ services;
c.
5
6
7
8
Circumventing any technological measure that controls access to
LinkedIn’s Servers;
d.
Offering, selling, making available for sale, or otherwise copying and/or
transferring (including for free) LinkedIn Data to any third party, or offering or developing any
software or services that can be used by third parties to obtain LinkedIn Data from LinkedIn’s
9 Servers in automated ways.
10
e.
Enrolling or attempting to enroll in subscriptions and/or trials of Sales
11 Navigator or any other LinkedIn product by means of fraud and deceit, including but not limited to
12
enrollment using LinkedIn accounts registered under fictitious names; or
f.
13
Engaging in any activity likely to dilute the distinctiveness of LinkedIn’s
registered marks.
14
15
Defendants represent that they have destroyed all LinkedIn member profile data, whether
stored in electronic form or otherwise, in their possession, custody, or control and have certified in
16 writing that they have done so.
Violation of this Final Judgment on Consent shall expose Defendants and all other persons
17
18 bound by this Final Judgment on Consent to all applicable penalties, including contempt of Court.
All claims and defenses in this action are hereby resolved by this Final Judgment on
19
20
Consent. This Final Judgment on Consent is final and may not be appealed by any party. The
Clerk shall enter this Final Judgment on Consent forthwith.
21
This Court shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the parties and the action for purposes
22 of enforcing this Final Judgment on Consent.
23 //
24
25
-3FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT
Case 4:22-cv-00651-HSG Document 19 Filed 05/09/22 Page 4 of 5
1 DATED: May 6, 2022
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
2
By:
3
4
5
6
/s/ Jonathan H. Blavin
JONATHAN H. BLAVIN
Attorneys for LinkedIn Corporation
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
DATED: May 6, 2022
7
8
By:
/s/ Terry L. Wit
TERRY L. WIT
Attorneys for Defendants
9
10 FINAL JUDGMENT: PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
12 DATED: May 9, 2022
13
HONORABLE HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-4FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT
Case 4:22-cv-00651-HSG Document 19 Filed 05/09/22 Page 5 of 5
1
2
ECF ATTESTATION
I, Jonathan H. Blavin, attest that all other signatories listed, and on whose behalf the filing
3 is submitted, concur in the filing’s content and have authorized the e-filing of the foregoing
4 document in compliance with Local Rule 5-1(h)(3).
5
/s/ Jonathan H. Blavin
Jonathan H. Blavin
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-5[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT
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?