Liberty Media Holdings LLC v. FF Magnat Limited et al
Filing
11
ORDER Granting 2 Motion for TRO. Motion Hearing re 4 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and 6 MOTION to Appoint Receiver is set for 7/3/2012 02:30 PM in LV Courtroom 7D before Judge Gloria M. Navarro. Responses to 4 Motion for Preliminary Injunction are due by 5:00pm on 6/27/2012. Replies to 4 Motion for Preliminary Injunction are due by 12:00pm on 7/2/2012. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 6/21/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3
4
LIBERTY MEDIA HOLDINGS, LLC,
a California Corporation,
5
Plaintiff,
6
vs.
7
8
9
10
11
12
FF MAGNAT LIMITED, d/b/a Oron.com;
MAXIM BOCHENKO, a/k/a Roman
Romanov; and John Does 1-500,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 2:12-cv-01057-GMN-RJJ
ORDER
The Plaintiff has shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its claims
13
sufficient for the Court to issue a limited Temporary Restraining Order. Plaintiff alleges
14
copyright infringement, contributory copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement
15
and inducement of copyright infringement. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) To show a substantial
16
likelihood of prevailing on the merits of a copyright infringement claim, Plaintiff must show
17
that: (1) it owns the copyright to which its infringement claims relate; and, (2) Defendants
18
violated one of the Plaintiff’s exclusive rights in the works. See Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural
19
Tel. Serv. Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 361 (1991); Latimer v. Roaring Toyz, Inc., 601 F.3d 1224,
20
1232-33 (11th Cir. 2010); Sid & Marty Krofft Television Prods., Inc. v. McDonald’s Corp.,
21
562 F.2d 1157, 1162 (9th Cir 1977); Educational Testing Servs. v. Katzman, 793 F.2d 533,
22
538 (3d Cir. 1977). These two factors have been clearly established by the Plaintiff.
23
Plaintiff has established irreparable harm wherein there is a substantial chance that
24
upon final resolution, the movant cannot be made whole. Plaintiff has demonstrated that
25
Defendants are engaged in allegedly fraudulent transfers that may impinge on the Court’s
Page 1 of 4
1
ability to issue effective equitable relief. See In re Estate of Ferdinand Marcos, Human Rights
2
Litigation, 25 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir. 1994) (proper to issue an injunction to keep assets from
3
being dissipated overseas, especially where defendant had engaged in a pattern of such
4
activity).
5
The balance of equities favors the issuance of a temporary restraining order in that it is
6
limited in scope and it does nothing more than prohibit Defendants from fraudulent transfers
7
and compels that they unwind those in which they have already engaged. Freezing the domain
8
names and any U.S. funds protects Plaintiff’s ability to receive any possible relief. There is
9
also a genuine public interest in upholding copyright protections. See Erickson v. Trinity
10
Theatre, Inc., 13 F.3d 1061, 1066 (7th Cir. 1994) (quoting Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin
11
Computer Corp., 714 F.2d 1240, 1255 (3d Cir. 1983) (“It is virtually axiomatic that the public
12
interest can only be served by upholding copyright protections …”)).
13
Finding that the Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause for the relief requested herein,
14
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
15
1.
Any bank or financial institution in the United States with an account belonging to
16
FF Magnat Limited, Oron.com; Maxim Bochenko, Roman Romanov, or
17
anyone acting demonstrably in concert with them, will immediately freeze those
18
funds from being withdrawn for a period of fourteen (14) days until a hearing
19
on the Preliminary Injunction can be held;
20
2.
PayPal, Inc. will immediately freeze any and all funds in any FF Magnat
21
Limited or Oron.com accounts from being withdrawn for a period of fourteen
22
(14) days until a hearing on Preliminary Injunction can be held;
23
3.
CCBill, LLC will immediately freeze any and all funds in any FF Magnat
24
Limited or Oron.com accounts from being withdrawn for a period of fourteen
25
(14) days until a hearing on Preliminary Injunction can be held;
Page 2 of 4
1
4.
AlertPay will immediately freeze any and all funds in any FF Magnat Limited
2
or Oron.com accounts from being withdrawn for a period of fourteen (14)
3
days until a hearing on Preliminary Injunction can be held;
4
5.
transfers;
5
6
6.
9
10
11
All Defendants are hereby enjoined from disgorging or dissipating any funds,
property, domain names, or other assets until further notice.
7
8
VeriSign will freeze the www.oron.com domain name from any further
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that security pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 65 shall be posted immediately after entry of this Order in the amount of ONE
HUNDRED ($100.00) DOLLARS AND NO CENTS.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff immediately serve the Complaint, Motion
12
For Temporary Restraining Order, Motion For Preliminary Injunction, and copy of this Order
13
on Defendants.
14
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, July 3, 2012
15
at 2:30 p.m., before the Honorable Gloria M. Navarro, United States District Judge, in
16
Courtroom 7D of the Lloyd D. George United States Courthouse, 333 Las Vegas Boulevard,
17
South, Las Vegas, Nevada, for Defendants to show cause why an Order pursuant to Federal
18
Rule of Civil Procedure 65 should not be entered granting to Plaintiff a preliminary injunction
19
extending the relief granted by this Temporary Restraining Order. Plaintiff’s request to have a
20
receiver appointed to take possession of the Defendant’s assets will also be addressed at that
21
hearing.
22
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ answering papers shall be filed with
23
the Clerk of this Court and served on Plaintiff’s attorneys, with a courtesy copy being
24
delivered to Judge Gloria M. Navarro’s chambers, on or before 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday,
25
June 27, 2012. Reply papers shall be likewise filed with the Clerk of this Court and served on
Page 3 of 4
1
Defendants’ attorneys, with a courtesy copy being delivered to Judge Gloria M. Navarro’s
2
chambers, on or before 12:00 noon on Monday, July 2, 2012.
3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for expedited discovery is
4
DENIED without prejudice, as Plaintiff gives no proposed timeline or justification for
5
expedited discovery in its motion.
6
DATED this 21st day of June, 2012.
7
8
9
10
________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro
United States District Judge
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 4 of 4
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?