Shenzhen Risheng Yueheng E-Commerce Co., Ltd. v. Vesync Corp.

Background

The parties submitted a joint letter concerning the plaintiff’s request for expedited, limited discovery related to Vesync’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiff also requested an extended briefing schedule and an evidentiary hearing on that motion. The plaintiff’s then-current deadline to respond to the preliminary-injunction motion was November 24, 2025.

The plaintiff proposed 60 days of targeted discovery, followed by 14 days for its opposition and seven days for Vesync’s reply. It also requested that Vesync respond to discovery within 10 days and produce witnesses for deposition within two weeks after serving those responses. The plaintiff identified requested discovery involving documents, interrogatories, depositions of Jeremy Liauw and Bill Lin, subpoenas to SGS concerning three tests, and expert analysis of HEPA standards and the testing reports.

The Parties’ Positions

The plaintiff argued that good cause supported expedited discovery because Vesync sought immediate relief based on what the plaintiff characterized as a one-sided and undeveloped record. The plaintiff said the discovery was narrow, proportional, and needed to test Vesync’s factual assertions about advertising claims.

Vesync opposed expedited discovery, an extended briefing schedule, and an evidentiary hearing. Vesync argued that the plaintiff had not shown good cause or irreparable injury, that the motion concerned only two advertising statements about one product, and that independent laboratory testing supported Vesync’s position. Vesync also argued that the requested discovery would delay resolution during the holiday shopping season. As a compromise, Vesync offered to make Jeremy Liauw available for a deposition before December 4, 2025.

The letter also states that the court would discuss the plaintiff’s proposed motion to dismiss Vesync’s counterclaims at the conference. The text does not provide a ruling on that proposed motion.

Court’s Action

Judge Woods ordered a conference on November 20, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 12C of the Southern District of New York. The conference was scheduled to discuss the plaintiff’s discovery request and its proposed motion to dismiss Vesync’s counterclaims. The order did not grant or deny the requests for expedited discovery, an extended briefing schedule, or a preliminary-injunction evidentiary hearing.