新立案商标历史数据

IN-N-OUT BURGERS

IN-N-OUT BURGERS

最后更新2026/08/01 11:10

案件基本信息

2026-cv-00932
案件号
2026-cv-00932
起诉日期
2026/01/27
原告
维权品牌
In-N-Out Burgers 汉堡包品牌
原告律所
Warner Norcross + Judd
法院
伊利诺伊州北区地方法院
法官

案件进展 Docket

21 条记录
·

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: The Court requires that any motion for a temporary restraining order and/or asset freeze is accompanied by a declaration from an attorney of record that provides the following information. First, to demonstrate the immediate harm necessary to grant the drastic remedy of an ex parte temporary restraining order, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant has sold or offered to sell the allegedly infringing product(s) within the last two months and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Generally, evidence that a defendant has sold or offered to sell the infringing products within the last two months may include: (1) screenshots of the listings collected within the last two months; (2) screenshots older than two months with an attestation that the listings reflected in the screenshots have been checked within the last two months and were active; or (3) evidence of a purchase by a customer in Illinois within the last two months. Second, as relevant to personal jurisdiction, without which any temporary restraining order or asset freeze would be invalid, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant sold at least one allegedly infringing product to a customer in Illinois and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Here, "sold" means that the defendant accepted an order and payment for an allegedly infringing product to be shipped to Illinois. Third, to assure that Court that the rights of defendants who have not yet been served are being appropriately protected, the declaration must identify the case number(s) and assigned judge(s) for any pending case(s) brought by the plaintiff(s) against any of the named defendants, noting whether the intellectual property at issue was the same or different than in this case. If it is the same, the declaration should describe the disposition of the other case. The Court will address any motion for a temporary restraining order only after receipt of the described declaration, which can be filed contemporaneously with the motion. Additionally, to the extent Plaintiff also makes a motion for expedited discovery or for an order permitting electronic service of process, Plaintiff should submit a proposed order for that relief that is separate from the proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint. The proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint should name the relevant defendants directly in the order, without reference to Schedule A. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: The Court requires that any motion for a temporary restraining order and/or asset freeze is accompanied by a declaration from an attorney of record that provides the following information. First, to demonstrate the immediate harm necessary to grant the drastic remedy of an ex parte temporary restraining order, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant has sold or offered to sell the allegedly infringing product(s) within the last two months and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Generally, evidence that a defendant has sold or offered to sell the infringing products within the last two months may include: (1) screenshots of the listings collected within the last two months; (2) screenshots older than two months with an attestation that the listings reflected in the screenshots have been checked within the last two months and were active; or (3) evidence of a purchase by a customer in Illinois within the last two months. Second, as relevant to personal jurisdiction, without which any temporary restraining order or asset freeze would be invalid, the declaration must confirm that each named defendant sold at least one allegedly infringing product to a customer in Illinois and describe the evidence supporting this confirmation. Here, "sold" means that the defendant accepted an order and payment for an allegedly infringing product to be shipped to Illinois. Third, to assure that Court that the rights of defendants who have not yet been served are being appropriately protected, the declaration must identify the case number(s) and assigned judge(s) for any pending case(s) brought by the plaintiff(s) against any of the named defendants, noting whether the intellectual property at issue was the same or different than in this case. If it is the same, the declaration should describe the disposition of the other case. The Court will address any motion for a temporary restraining order only after receipt of the described declaration, which can be filed contemporaneously with the motion. Additionally, to the extent Plaintiff also makes a motion for expedited discovery or for an order permitting electronic service of process, Plaintiff should submit a proposed order for that relief that is separate from the proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint. The proposed order for the TRO and asset restraint should name the relevant defendants directly in the order, without reference to Schedule A. Mailed notice.

·

DECLARATION of Brian D. Wassom regarding motion for miscellaneous relief 16, memorandum in support of motion 17

DECLARATION of Brian D. Wassom regarding motion for miscellaneous relief 16, memorandum in support of motion 17

·

MEMORANDUM by IN-N-OUT BURGERS in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 16 for Electronic Service of Process

MEMORANDUM by IN-N-OUT BURGERS in support of motion for miscellaneous relief 16 for Electronic Service of Process

·

MOTION by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERSElectronic Service of Process

MOTION by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERSElectronic Service of Process

·

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS Sealed Temporary Restraining Order

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS Sealed Temporary Restraining Order

·

DECLARATION of Joe Tadros regarding motion for temporary restraining order 10, memorandum in support of motion 11

DECLARATION of Joe Tadros regarding motion for temporary restraining order 10, memorandum in support of motion 11

·

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS Exhibit 4-Counterfeits to Declaration of Brian Wassom

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS Exhibit 4-Counterfeits to Declaration of Brian Wassom

·

DECLARATION of Brian D. Wassom regarding motion for temporary restraining order 10, memorandum in support of motion 11

DECLARATION of Brian D. Wassom regarding motion for temporary restraining order 10, memorandum in support of motion 11

·

MEMORANDUM by IN-N-OUT BURGERS in support of motion for temporary restraining order 10 Including Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery

MEMORANDUM by IN-N-OUT BURGERS in support of motion for temporary restraining order 10 Including Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery

·

MOTION by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS for temporary restraining order Including Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery

MOTION by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS for temporary restraining order Including Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery

·

Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by IN-N-OUT BURGERS

Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by IN-N-OUT BURGERS

·

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by IN-N-OUT BURGERS

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by IN-N-OUT BURGERS

·

CIVIL Cover Sheet

CIVIL Cover Sheet

·

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Motion for leave to file under seal 2 is granted. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Motion for leave to file under seal 2 is granted. Mailed notice.

·

ORDER: Local Rule 3.1 requires at the time of filing a case, plaintiff's counsel, or if the case is filed pro se, the plaintiff shall file with the original papers a completed designation sheet (civil cover sheet). No civil cover sheet was submitted at the time of filing this matter. IN-N-OUT BURGERS is directed to file the Civil Cover Sheet within 14 days of this notification. Signed by the Executive Committee.

ORDER: Local Rule 3.1 requires at the time of filing a case, plaintiff's counsel, or if the case is filed pro se, the plaintiff shall file with the original papers a completed designation sheet (civil cover sheet). No civil cover sheet was submitted at the time of filing this matter. IN-N-OUT BURGERS is directed to file the Civil Cover Sheet within 14 days of this notification. Signed by the Executive Committee.

·

CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order.

CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order.

·

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2).

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2).

·

MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA.

MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA.

·

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS Schedule A to Complaint

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS Schedule A to Complaint

·

MOTION by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS to seal document

MOTION by Plaintiff IN-N-OUT BURGERS to seal document

·

COMPLAINT filed by IN-N-OUT BURGERS; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-24647645.

COMPLAINT filed by IN-N-OUT BURGERS; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-24647645.