Li v. Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

Background

Jiaorong Li filed an emergency, one-sided request for a temporary restraining order against e-commerce stores operating product listings identified in Schedule A to the complaint. The request sought a temporary injunction, temporary restraints on assets, and expedited discovery. The court considered papers and pleadings filed under seal.

Why the Court Denied the Request

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 requires a party seeking an emergency restraining order without notifying the opposing party to provide specific facts in an affidavit or verified complaint showing that immediate and irreparable harm will occur before the other side can respond. The party's lawyer must also certify efforts to provide notice and explain why notice should not be required. A Southern District of New York local rule likewise requires a clear and specific affidavit-based explanation for seeking an order without notice.

The court held that Li did not satisfy these procedural requirements because the request was not supported by an affidavit or verified complaint. The court therefore denied the motion. The opinion did not decide the merits of Li's allegations or whether the requested restrictions were otherwise warranted.

Identification of Defendants

The court additionally found that Li had not identified, or provided enough information to identify, the defendants. Schedule A contained links to allegedly infringing products but did not provide the names of the seller businesses. The court also noted that one link did not return a product and another could not be accessed without an account.

The court stated that product links alone were insufficient and directed Li to file an amended Schedule A identifying the seller businesses in order to proceed.