Eli Zhadanov and Interlink Products International, Inc. v. Xiamen Huangyudu Cosmetics Co., Ltd. and Huian County Mubing E-Commerce Co., Ltd.

Summary

The Eastern District of New York denied plaintiffs’ ex parte request for a temporary restraining order in a patent and related commercial dispute involving showerhead products sold on Amazon. The court held that plaintiffs had not certified efforts to provide notice or reasons why notice should be excused and had not separately moved for the requested relief. The court also ordered plaintiffs to show cause why the action should not be transferred to the Western District of Washington to avoid duplicative litigation.

Holdings

1. An ex parte TRO is improper when the movant provides neither notice to the defendants nor the written certification of efforts to provide notice and reasons why notice should not be required. Plaintiffs' failure to satisfy that requirement alone required denial of the TRO request.
2. A request for immediate injunctive relief is not properly before the court when it appears only in the complaint and is not presented through a separately filed motion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiffs satisfied the notice and certification requirements for an ex parte temporary restraining order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(B).
2. Whether a request for a temporary restraining order included only in a complaint, without a separately filed motion, is properly before the court.
3. Whether the action should potentially be transferred to the Western District of Washington to avoid duplicative litigation.

Disposition

denied