King Spider LLC. v. Foshanshibingjiehaoyi et al

Filing 26

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff King Spider LLC filed its Complaint in the above-captioned action (currently under seal) on July 26, 2024, simultaneously moving, pursuant to Rule 65(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for entry of an ex parte temporary restraining order ("TRO"). Plaintiff's memorandum of law filed in support of its proposed TRO clocks in at thirty-five pages, well over the twenty-five page limit set for memoranda of law in the Court's Indi vidual Rules and Practices. Plaintiff did not seek prior leave from the undersigned to file an oversized memorandum of law. To the extent it obtained leave from the Part I Judge who granted Plaintiff leave to file this action under seal, any such or der is hereby VACATED. Further, Plaintiff's memorandum is STRICKEN and its request for a TRO is accordingly DENIED without prejudice to renewal along with a memorandum of law that conforms to the Court's Individual Rules and Practices ( namely, one that does not exceed twenty-five pages). In other, similar cases filed by Plaintiff's counsel, the undersigned has expressed that counsel would be well-advised to wait until a Judge is assigned to any newly filed case before seeki ng relief, to enable counsel to conform to that Judge's practices and to address or acknowledge that Judge's prior rulings in the memorandum of law. In that vein, in any renewed request for a TRO, counsel should carefully review (and d iscuss or address as appropriate) the Courts previous Opinions and Orders and modifications to TROs and preliminary injunctions in similar cases (many, if not all, of which were brought by the same counsel). See, e.g., King Spider LLC v. 884886 CH Store, No. 23-CV-3472 (JMF) (ECF Nos. 3 & 83) (granting TROs as modified); id. (ECF No. 96) (granting preliminary injunction as modified); Kelly Toys Holdings LLC v. 19885566 Store, No. 22-CV-9384 (JMF) (ECF No. 143) (granting motion for reconsiderat ion of contempt Order and narrowing the scope of preliminary injunctive relief granted against third-party service providers). Plaintiff shall continue to provide the Court with courtesy copies (via email) of any future filings while this case remain s under seal. To the extent such filings are too large to be sent as PDF attachments, counsel shall email Chambers to request a link to the Court's secure file transfer system. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/1/2024) (ks)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X
:
KING SPIDER LLC,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-v:
:
FOSHANSHIBINGJIEHAOYI et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
:
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X

24-CV-5673 (JMF)
SEALED
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER

JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff King Spider LLC filed its Complaint in the above-captioned action (currently
under seal) on July 26, 2024, simultaneously moving, pursuant to Rule 65(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, for entry of an ex parte temporary restraining order (“TRO”).
Plaintiff’s memorandum of law filed in support of its proposed TRO clocks in at thirty-five
pages, well over the twenty-five page limit set for memoranda of law in the Court’s Individual
Rules and Practices. Plaintiff did not seek prior leave from the undersigned to file an oversized
memorandum of law. To the extent it obtained leave from the Part I Judge who granted Plaintiff
leave to file this action under seal, any such order is hereby VACATED. Further, Plaintiff’s
memorandum is STRICKEN and its request for a TRO is accordingly DENIED without
prejudice to renewal along with a memorandum of law that conforms to the Court’s Individual
Rules and Practices (namely, one that does not exceed twenty-five pages).
In other, similar cases filed by Plaintiff’s counsel, the undersigned has expressed that
counsel would be well-advised to wait until a Judge is assigned to any newly filed case before
seeking relief, to enable counsel to conform to that Judge’s practices and to address or
acknowledge that Judge’s prior rulings in the memorandum of law. In that vein, in any renewed

request for a TRO, counsel should carefully review (and discuss or address as appropriate) the
Court’s previous Opinions and Orders and modifications to TROs and preliminary injunctions in
similar cases (many, if not all, of which were brought by the same counsel). See, e.g., King
Spider LLC v. 884886 CH Store, No. 23-CV-3472 (JMF) (ECF Nos. 3 & 83) (granting TROs as
modified); id. (ECF No. 96) (granting preliminary injunction as modified); Kelly Toys Holdings
LLC v. 19885566 Store, No. 22-CV-9384 (JMF) (ECF No. 143) (granting motion for
reconsideration of contempt Order and narrowing the scope of preliminary injunctive relief
granted against third-party service providers).
Plaintiff shall continue to provide the Court with courtesy copies (via email) of any future
filings while this case remains under seal. To the extent such filings are too large to be sent as
PDF attachments, counsel shall email Chambers to request a link to the Court’s secure file
transfer system.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 1, 2024
New York, New York

__________________________________
JESSE M. FURMAN
United States District Judge

2