ABC v. DEF

Filing 40

EX PARTE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ORDER, ORDER GRANTING ALTERNATIVE SERVICE, AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Defendants, including the New Defendants, their officers, agents, se rvants, employees, and attorneys, and all others in active concert or participation with them, who receive actual notice of this Order by personal service or otherwise ("Restrained Parties"), are temporarily restrained and enjoined from, anywhere in the world: Using or counterfeiting the Playboy Marks, the PLAYBOY Copyrights, and/or associated common law rights, or any confusingly similar marks, reproduction, counterfeit copies, or spurious imitations thereof, on or in connection with the offering of any goods and/or services, licensing services, websites, or social media, including but not limited to, owning or operating the Counterfeit Websites, Additional Domain and/or Counterfeit Domains. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED th at, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, Playboy shall, within three (3) days of entry of this Order, post a bond in the amount of $15,000 as payment of damages to which Defendants may be entitled for wrongful injunction or re straint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, on November 12, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., or at such other date and time as may be fixed by the Court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6510, the Defendants shall appear and show cause hearing before the Honorable Victor Marrero, United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, via teleconference, why a preliminary injunction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 should not be granted, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, upon completion of service upon Defendants, the parties shall meet and confer and submit a joint proposed briefing schedule within two (2) days of the date of service. In accordance with the schedule, as approved by the Court, oppos ition papers, if any, be filed by Defendants with this Court and served by personal service, notice of electronic filing, facsimile, or email upon Playboy's legal counsel, Venable LLP, at their offices at 1270 Avenue of the Americas, 24th Floo r, New York, NY 10020, and reply papers shall be filed and served in the equivalent manner. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Telephone Conference set for 11/12/2021 at 09:30 AM before Judge Victor Marrero.) (Signed by Judge Victor Marrero on 11/5/2021) (jca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
:
PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES
INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

11/5/2021

:
:
Plaintiff,

v.

No. 1:21-cv-06419-VM

:

EX PARTE TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER,
EXPEDITED DISCOVERY
ORDER, ORDER GRANTING
ALTERNATIVE SERVICE,
AND ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE RE: PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION

:

PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES, INC., et al..
Defendants.

:
:
:

Plaintiff Playboy Enterprises International, Inc. (“Playboy”)1 filed its original complaint
to stop the Original Defendants2 from stealing the contents of Playboy’s Website, counterfeiting
the Playboy trademarks and PLAYBOY© Copyrights, forging documents and registering
fraudulent entities in furtherance of their unlawful acts.

1
2

All undefined terms herein have the same meaning as in Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint.

Defined as Playboy Enterprises, Inc.; PLBY Group, Inc.; Junhan Huang, aka John Huang;
Mountain Crest Acquisition Corp., Playboy Enterprises (Asia) Limited; Wong’s Capital Holding
Group Limited; Playboy (China) Brand Management Center; Playboy Tobacco Group Limited;
Huahua Rabbit (Xiamen) Health Science and Technology Co., Ltd.; Haihan Fashion (Shanghai)
Enterprises Development Co., Ltd., Bunny Owner Group; Bunnygirl Certification Institute;
Bunny Girl Foundation; Bunny Girl Union; Bunny Hunter LLC; International Model
Certification Association; Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.; Pleasure International Corp.;
Wong’s Bank Group; Wong’s Foundation; Wong’s International Bank; Wong’s Syndicate;
World Future Leader University; World Industrial Capital Organization, Fu Manhua, Ming Cai,
Lingling Zhang, and John Fu.

Playboy filed its Complaint under: (1) the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125(a),
1116) (Counts I and III); (2) the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 101, et seq. 502) (Count II), and (3)
trademark and unfair competition under New York common law (Count IV).
Simultaneous with filing its original Complaint, Playboy moved against the original
Defendants, under seal, for emergency ex parte relief in the form of a temporary restraining
order, account and asset freeze order, expedited discovery order, order granting alternative
service, and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be granted.
On July 29, 2021, the Court granted Playboy’s application, entering a temporary
restraining order among other relief. See ECF 18. Following a preliminary injunction hearing on
August 12, 2021, the court then granted Playboy’s request for a preliminary injunction against
the Original Defendants. See ECF 24.
Since entering those orders, Playboy has filed an Amended Complaint in this action on
October 30, 2021 adding five New Defendants to this action: (1) Huase Space (Fujian) Brand
Management Co., Ltd.; (2) King Wong; (3) Kai Ming LAI; (4) Flower Color Space (Fujian)
Brand Management Company Ltd., and (5) Fancy Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co. Ltd.
(“New Defendants”). See ECF 25.
Playboy’s Amended Complaint and this Application demonstrate that the New
Defendants have undertaken new infringing and fraudulent actions in furtherance of the original
Defendants’ counterfeiting scheme. Playboy now moves for ex parte relief against the New
Defendants in the form of:

2

1. A temporary restraining order, which should be granted3 if Playboy establishes:
a. A likelihood of success on the merits;
b. Irreparable harm without the entry of a temporary restraining order;
c. That the balance of hardships tips in Playboy’s favor; and
d. That the public interest would be served by the entry of a temporary restraining
order
2. An expedited discovery order;
3. An order granting alternative service by email or other electronic means; and
4. An order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be granted (“Ex Parte
Application”). Having reviewed Playboy’s original complaint, Amended Complaint, the
Ex Parte Application and all supporting declarations and exhibits thereto,
THE COURT HEREBY FINDS THAT:
Jurisdiction and Venue
1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Playboy’s claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
& 1338, and 15 U.S.C. § 1121.
2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the New Defendants because:
a. The Court will be considering matters related to Defendants’ registration of
Fraudulent Entities and addresses in this district and within New York state as
well as other states;

3

See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008); Seijas v. Republic of
Argentina, 352 Fed. App’x. 519, 521 (2d Cir. 2009).
3

b. The Defendants are operating the Counterfeit Websites4 accessible and interactive
to users in this district and within New York state; and
c. Playboy’s Complaint and moving papers demonstrate that Defendants undertook
the unlawful counterfeiting scheme with knowledge that they would cause
consumers and Playboy harm through the Counterfeit Websites accessible to
consumers in New York as Playboy does business in New York and has done
business in New York for dozens of years.
See Amended Complaint ¶¶ 15-22; Brief Simultaneously Filed I.S.O. Ex Parte Application
(“Brief”), pp 7-8.
3. Venue is proper in this judicial district in the Southern District of New York (see 28
U.S.C. § 1391) because:
a. A substantial part of the conduct and the property at issue is located in this
jurisdiction. Defendants’ have registered Fraudulent Entities with addresses
located in this judicial district in furtherance of their counterfeiting scheme.
b. Additionally, the Complaint alleges facts to show that Defendants are subject to
personal jurisdiction in this judicial district, and no other district appears more
appropriately suited to resolve this dispute.
See Amended Complaint ¶ 23.
4. The Complaint pleads sufficient facts and states claims against the New Defendants for:

4

Defined as www.playboychinabrand.com, and www.playboygo.com.
4

a. Trademark counterfeiting, unfair competition, and false designation of origin, in
violation of the Lanham Act, Sections 32 and 43(a) (15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125(a)
(Counts I and IV);
b. Copyright infringement, in violation of the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et
seq.) (Count III); and
c. Trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation of New York
common law (Count IV).
Likelihood of Success on the Merits of Playboy’s Claims in the Complaint
5. Playboy is likely to succeed on the merits of these claims because Playboy has shown
that:
a. It owns the registered Playboy Marks5 and associated common-law rights
(Amended Complaint ¶¶ 161-176, Ex. 4; Declaration of Jennifer McCarthy [ECF
17 (“McCarthy I Decl.”), ¶¶ 12-30; Declaration of Jennifer McCarthy
simultaneously filed (“McCarthy II Decl.”), ¶ 10.a-b).
b. Defendants’ fraudulent scheme involves counterfeiting those exact trademarks for
the exact online retail store services and goods as Playboy, thereby confusing
customers (Amended Complaint ¶¶ 182-222, Ex.7; McCarthy I Decl. ¶¶ 31-62;
McCarthy II Decl. ¶ 10.c) (See 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1), 1125(a));

5

Defined as the PLAYBOY® Trademarks, RABBIT HEAD DESIGN® Trademarks, BUNNY
STORE® Trademark, PLBY® Trademark, and PLEASURE FOR ALL® Trademarks
collectively, along with their common low rights, as defined in Playboy’s Complaint.
5

c. Playboy owns the registered copyrights in the PLAYBOY© Copyrights6
(Amended Complaint ¶¶ 177-181, Ex. 5; McCarthy I Decl. ¶¶ 63-67; McCarthy II
Decl. ¶ 10.d).
d. In creating the Counterfeit Websites Defendants directly copied and infringed
Playboy’s copyrighted content, including but not limited to the PLAYBOY©
Copyrights (Amended Complaint ¶¶ 182-222, Ex. 8; McCarthy Decl.¶ 68-71;
McCarthy Decl. II ¶ 10.e) (See 17 U.S.C. § 106); and
e. The Defendants, through the New Defendants, have continued to infringe the
Playboy Marks since the filing of Playboy’s original complaint and preliminary
injunction order (Amended Complaint ¶¶ 244-266, Exs 10-12; McCarthy Decl. II
¶¶ 11-36, Exs. A-C).
Playboy also has established a likelihood of success on the merits of its New York
common law trademark infringement and unfair competition claims because the elements of
those mirror the elements of Lanham Act trademark infringement and unfair competition claims,
and Playboy is likely to succeed on the merits of its Lanham Act claims. Avon Prods. V. S.C.
Johnson & Son, 984 F. Supp. 768, 800 (S.D.N.Y. 1997); Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v.
Marvel Enters., 220 F. Supp. 2d 289 (S.D.N.Y. 2002); Franklin v. X Gear 101, LLC, 17 Civ.
6452 (GBD) (GWG) 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122658 (S.D.N.Y. July 23, 2018).
Irreparable Harm
6.

Playboy also has established that it will suffer immediate, irreparable harm if this

Court denies this ex parte Application. Specifically, it has shown that it has a strong reputation

6

Defined as U.S. Copyright Registration Nos. VA 2-144-651, and VA 2-174-035.
6

and goodwill under the Playboy Marks (and other source identifiers), which was established due
to Playboy’s lengthy and (until now) exclusive use of those marks in connection with Playboy’s
authentic Website, goods and services. See McCarthy I Decl. ¶¶ 91-100; McCarthy II Decl. ¶¶
37-40.
7.

Defendants have exploited Playboy’s reputation and goodwill, using it to trick the

public, consumers, government agencies, and potential licensees into thinking that Defendants
are affiliated with, or authorized by, Playboy when they are not.
8.

Namely, Playboy has shown that the New Defendants have filed a fraudulent

statement of information document (“Fraudulent SOI”) with the California Secretary of State
purporting to be on behalf of Plaintiff Playboy, when it was not.
9.

The New Defendants then used the Fraudulent SOI to license the Playboy Marks

to others without authorization from Playboy. McCarthy II Decl. ¶¶ 20-32.
10.

Playboy has shown that consumers access Defendants’ Counterfeit Websites

and/or Counterfeit Domains7 only because they think Defendants’ Counterfeit Websites and/or
Counterfeit Domains are Playboy-affiliated.
11.

If consumers come to think they cannot trust Playboy or Playboy’s authentic

Website because of Defendants’ actions, then Playboy’s reputation and goodwill will erode –
that is the definition of irreparable harm. See McCarthy I Decl. ¶ 91.
12.

Defendants’ creation of multiple Fraudulent Entities using the Playboy Marks

without authorization, Defendants’ use of forged documents purporting to be executed by

7

Defined as www.playboy.com.hk, www.playboyint.com, and www.playboylicense.com.
7

Playboy, and Defendants’ creation of the Additional Domain8 is likely to have lasting irreparable
harm on Playboy’s licensing business in the United States and overseas. McCarthy II ¶¶ Decl.
37-39.
Balance of the Hardships
13.

Playboy also has shown that the balance of hardships tips in its favor.

14.

Playboy has a protectable legal interest in protecting its reputation under the

Playboy Marks, PLAYBOY© Copyrights, and other source identifiers.
15.

By contrast, there is no evidence showing that Defendants have any protectable

interest in counterfeiting those source identifiers to defraud Playboy out of the control over its
intellectual property. AW Licensing, LLC v. Bao, No. 15-cv-1373, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
177101 (S.D.N.Y. April 2, 2015)
Public Interest
16.

Playboy also has shown that the public interest favors granting the Ex Parte

Application. The public has a strong interest in being protected from confusion in general. But
the public has an even stronger interest in being protected from illegal phishing schemes,
namely, being manipulated through trademark counterfeiting into believing that they are doing
business with Playboy, when they are not.
Good Cause for Expedited Discovery
17.

The Court also finds good cause to grant expedited discovery.

18.

The New Defendants succeed in their scheme, in part, because they operate

anonymously using residential addresses that do not correspond to the businesses that they

8

Defined as http://www.papaintl.com/.
8

purport to be.
19.

The New Defendants and any third parties should be compelled, immediately, to

disclose Defendants’ identities.
20.

Expedited discovery will provide certain information about the New Defendants’

counterfeiting scheme via third-party instrumentalities, so these instrumentalities can be shut
down, so evidence can be preserved for trial, and so this Court can grant effective final relief.
Streamlight, Inc. v. Gindi, 18-CV-987 (NG) (E.D.N.Y. April 23, 2018) (granting expedited
discovery where the plaintiffs sought to identify all persons involved in the counterfeiting);
Dentsply Sirona Inc. v. LIK Supply, Corp., 3:16-cv-00806 (MAD/DEP) (N.D.N.Y. July 15,
2016) (granting expedited discovery where the plaintiff was unable to ascertain the extent of the
defendants’ counterfeiting without it); Admarketplace, Inc. v. Tee Support, Inc., 13-civ-5635LGS 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129749 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 11, 2013).
Good Cause for Alternative Service
21.

The Court finds good cause to grant alternative service on the New Defendants

via email because Playboy establishes that traditional service methods would be futile. See
Amended Complaint, Ex. 11 (demonstrating that the New Defendants are using falsely using
Plaintiff Playboy’s physical address as their own).
22.

Email service is most likely to give the New Defendants notice of the lawsuit, and

the Original Defendants notice of this order; and email service also should be permitted on third
parties, because their compliance/cooperation is needed immediately to effectuate the ex parte
relief contemplated by this Order.
I.

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Defendants, including the New Defendants, their
9

officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and all others in active concert or
participation with them, who receive actual notice of this Order by personal service or otherwise
(“Restrained Parties”), are temporarily restrained and enjoined from, anywhere in the world:
1. Using or counterfeiting the Playboy Marks, the PLAYBOY© Copyrights, and/or
associated common law rights, or any confusingly similar marks, reproduction,
counterfeit copies, or spurious imitations thereof, on or in connection with the offering of
any goods and/or services, licensing services, websites, or social media, including but not
limited to, owning or operating the Counterfeit Websites, Additional Domain and/or
Counterfeit Domains;
2. Using or counterfeiting the Playboy Marks and/or PLAYBOY© Copyrights, or any
confusingly similar marks, on or in connection with the Fraudulent Entities or the legal
name or dba of any entity;
3. Operating any other website, licensing business or other business, entity, or store that
purports to originate from Playboy, or to be sponsored or licensed by, or affiliated with
Playboy or Playboy’s authentic Website, or contains any portion of the Playboy Marks
within its name or d.b.a., when it is not;
4. Forging, creating, circulating, or otherwise using any documents or materials purporting
to be executed by Playboy, or any of its affiliated entities, including but not limited to
forging signatures, seals, or other documents;
5. Filing any document with any organization, including but not limited to U.S. domestic
government agencies, and/or foreign governments or governmental agencies, purporting
to be on behalf of Playboy;
6. Forging, creating, circulating, or otherwise using any documents or materials purporting
10

to be issued by any U.S. domestic government agencies, and/or foreign governments or
governmental agencies in connection with Playboy and its business, including but not
limited to trademark registration certificates, or copyright registration certificates;
7. Registering, owning, or using any domain name that consists of any of the Playboy
Marks, or includes “Playboy” in the domain portion of the domain name and is using in
connection with the Playboy Marks, PLAYBOY© Copyrights, and/or any other Playboy
source identifier, or that is confusingly similar thereto, or that is calculated to confuse
consumers into thinking that the website(s) accessible via the domain name(s) originate
with/from Playboy, or is sponsored or licensed by, or affiliated with, Playboy or
Playboy’s authentic Website, when it is/they are not;
8. Registering, owning, or using any entity whose name or dba consists of the Playboy
Marks, or includes “Playboy”, or that is confusingly similar to any of the Playboy Marks,
or that is calculated to confuse consumers into believing that Defendants are Playboy,
affiliated with Playboy, or sponsored by Playboy, when they are not;
9. Using in connection with Defendants’ activities, goods, or services (or purported goods
or services) any false or deceptive designations, representations, or descriptions of
Defendants or their activities, goods, or services (or purported goods or services),
whether by symbols, words, designs, statements, photographs, or other devices, which
would damage or injure Playboy or its customers, or which would give Defendants an
unfair competitive advantage or result in consumer deception;
10. Committing other acts calculated to cause consumers to believe that Defendants’ domain
names, websites, web content, goods/or services are offered under the authorization,
sponsorship, supervision, or control of Playboy, or otherwise are connected with Playboy,
11

or Playboy’s authentic Website, when they are not;
11. Further infringing the Playboy Marks; PLAYBOY© Copyrights, and/or any other
Playboy source identifier, or damaging any associated goodwill;
12. Stealing Playboy’s customer’s or potential customer’s, licensees, or potential licensees.
13. Misappropriating that which rightfully belongs to Playboy, its customers or potential
customers, or in which Playboy or its customers or potential customers have a proprietary
interest;
14. Using, linking to, transferring, selling, exercising control over, or otherwise owning or
accessing the Counterfeit Websites, Counterfeit Domains, and Additional Domain.
15. Using, linking to, transferring, selling, exercising control over, or otherwise owning or
using the Fraudulent Entities;
16. Using, transferring, exercising control over, or otherwise accessing any accounts used in
the transfer of money or electronic currency, or in the processing of card-based
transactions associated with the Counterfeit Websites, Counterfeit Domains, Additional
Domain or Fraudulent Entities, as a means to further their fraudulent counterfeiting
scheme.
Upon service as provided for in this Order, the Defendants, and other Restrained Parties,
shall be deemed to have actual notice of the issuance and terms of the Temporary Restraining
Order, and any act by any of the Restrained Parties in violation of any of the terms of the
Temporary Restraining Order may be considered and prosecuted as contempt of Court.
In connection with this Order, the Court further finds and declares that:
1. the Defendants, including New Defendants HuaSe Space (Fujian) Brand Management
Co., Ltd., King Wong, Kai Ming LAI, Flower Color Space (Fujian) Brand
12

Management Company Ltd., and Fancy Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co. Ltd.
have never acquired any authorization from Plaintiff Playboy Enterprises
International, Inc. to act on its behalf;
2. The trademark authorization letters issued by the Defendants, including New
Defendants HuaSe Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co., Ltd., King Wong, Kai
Ming LAI, Flower Color Space (Fujian) Brand Management Company Ltd., and
Fancy Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co. Ltd. were not issued by Plaintiff
Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.;
3. New Defendant King Wong has never been the Chief Financial Officer of Plaintiff
Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.
4. New Defendant King Wong has no right to sign any documents on behalf of Plaintiff
Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.;
5. New Defendant Kai Ming LAI has never been the Chief Executive Officer of Plaintiff
Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.
6. New Defendant Kai Ming LAI has no right to sign any documents on behalf of
Plaintiff Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.;
7. Representatives for New Defendants HuaSe Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co.,
Ltd., Flower Color Space (Fujian) Brand Management Company Ltd., and Fancy
Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co. Ltd. have no right to sign any documents on
behalf of Plaintiff Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.
8. The Defendants, including New Defendants King Wong, Kai Ming LAI, HuaSe
Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co., Ltd., Flower Color Space (Fujian) Brand
Management Company Ltd., and Fancy Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co. Ltd.
13

are prohibited from acting on behalf of Plaintiff Playboy Enterprises International,
Inc.; and
9. The Defendants, including New Defendants King Wong, Kai Ming LAI, HuaSe
Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co., Ltd., Flower Color Space (Fujian) Brand
Management Company Ltd., and Fancy Space (Fujian) Brand Management Co. Ltd.
are not in possession of, or in control of, any authentic trademark registration
certificates belonging to Plaintiff Playboy Enterprises International, Inc.
Security for Temporary Restraining Order
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65,
Playboy shall, within three (3) days of entry of this Order, post a bond in the amount of $15,000
as payment of damages to which Defendants may be entitled for wrongful injunction or restraint.
II.

EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ORDER
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any third-party service provider providing services to

Defendants, New Defendants, or in connection with the Counterfeit Websites, Counterfeit
Domains, Additional Domain, Fraudulent Entities, or in connection with the Fraudulent SOI,
shall, within five (5) days after being served with or receiving actual notice of this Order, provide
to Playboy, via its legal counsel, expedited discovery, including copies of all documents and
records in such third party’s possession or control relating to:
1. The true identities and addresses of the New Defendants, and the locations and identifies
of the relevant Defendant’s operations, including without limitation identifying
information associated with the Counterfeit Websites, Counterfeit Domains, Additional
Domain, online account, or bank, merchant, or payment processing account(s), and
related financial accounts(s), or payment means by which Defendants have registered the
14

Fraudulent Entities, or submitted the Fraudulent SOI;
2. Any and all known internet websites owned or operated by Defendants;
3. Any and all documents related to the registration of the Fraudulent Entities;
4. Any and all documents related to the Fraudulent SOI;
5. Any and all known registered entities or businesses owned, registered, or used by
Defendants; and
6. Any and all bank, payment processing, or other financial accounts owned or controlled
by Defendants, including such accounts residing with or under the control of any banks,
savings and loan associations, merchant account providers, payment processors and
providers, credit card associations, or other financial institutions that receive or process
payments or hold assets on any Defendant’s behalf, including Visa, Mastercard,
American Express, Discover or other credit cards, PayPal, Bitcoin, Western Union, bank
or other third-party payment processing service provider.
III.

ORDER PERMITTING ALTERNATIVE SERVICE
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, good cause having been shown, Playboy may

serve upon all Defendants and upon any third-party service providers the documents initiating
this matter, including the Amended Complaint, Summons(es), Ex Parte Application and
supporting papers, and the Orders herein, by email or other electronic means, and/or by
overnight courier, using the identifying information set forth in Attachment 1 to the Hood
Declaration [ECF 16-1], and email addresses [e-mail], [e-mail],
and [e-mail]9 to the degree necessary to ensure and effectuate service.

9

As previously detailed in the Affidavit of Service signed by John Hood [ECF 21], the email
[e-mail] also is believed to be associated with the Defendants.

15

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, good cause having been shown, service of the
foregoing papers shall be made on Defendants within ten (10) days of the undersigned date.
Service may be made upon any third-party service provider at an earlier date to ensure full
execution of the terms of this Order.
IV.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION/SEIZURE
CONFIRMATION HEARING
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, on November 12, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., or at such other
date and time as may be fixed by the Court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6510, the Defendants shall
appear and show cause hearing before the Honorable Victor Marrero, United States District
Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, via
teleconference, why a preliminary injunction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65
should not be granted,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, upon completion of service upon Defendants, the
parties shall meet and confer and submit a joint proposed briefing schedule within two (2) days
of the date of service. In accordance with the schedule, as approved by the Court, opposition
papers, if any, be filed by Defendants with this Court and served by personal service, notice of
electronic filing, facsimile, or email upon Playboy’s legal counsel, Venable LLP, at their offices
at 1270 Avenue of the Americas, 24th Floor, New York, NY 10020, and reply papers shall be
filed and served in the equivalent manner.

10

Such date of the hearing is compliant with Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2) as it is within 14 days of
entry of this temporary restraining order, and as such, the temporary restraining order shall
remain in effect until the show cause hearing.
16

Failure to Oppose Will Result in Preliminary Injunction
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, Defendants, including the New Defendants are hereby put
on notice that failure to attend the preliminary injunction hearing scheduled herein shall result in
the issuance of a preliminary injunction, and that failure to oppose the preliminary injunction
may result in the issuance of a preliminary injunction, which shall extend through the pendency
of this action, depending on whether or not Defendants’ appear as directed for the preliminary
injunction hearing.
The Restrained Parties shall be deemed to have actual notice of the issuance and terms
of the preliminary injunction along the lines of the terms within the temporary restraining order
above, and any act by any of the Restrained Parties in violation of any of the terms of the
preliminary injunction may be considered and prosecuted as contempt of Court.

SO ORDERED
Date: November 5, 2021
New York, New York

17