Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 2, 2022

HTT Group LLC v. Individuals

Full caption

HTT Group LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unicorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A to the Complaint

Judge
Lewis Liman
Docket
1:22-cv-04206
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Preliminary InjunctionIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In HTT Group v. The Individuals, Judge Liman granted an emergency application but limited online-store restrictions to listings and sales involving counterfeit products.

Who this affects

HTT Group, LLC; the defendants identified on Schedule A to the complaint; and the online storefronts subject to the restrictions.

What happened

HTT Group, LLC asked the Southern District of New York for emergency relief against defendants identified on Schedule A to its complaint. The application concerned online storefronts and listings involving allegedly infringing and counterfeit products.

The court granted the application but changed the requested relief. It restricted the online storefronts from providing services to the defendants only when those services related to the defendants’ infringing listings or offering for sale or sale of counterfeit products. The court left open the possibility of renewing the broader request, stating that the current application did not support that relief.

Judge Lewis J. Liman entered the order on June 2, 2022. The order emphasized that an injunction must be narrowly tailored to specific legal violations and must not unnecessarily burden lawful activity.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
HTT Group LLC v. Individuals · No. 1:22-cv-04206
Judge
Lewis Liman
Date
June 2, 2022

Relief Requested

HTT Group, LLC submitted an ex parte application—that is, an application made without the other side participating at that stage—for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. The opinion states that the application sought relief affecting online storefronts and the defendants’ infringing listings and counterfeit products.

Court’s Ruling

The court granted the application, but modified the requested relief. The order restrains the online storefronts from providing services to the defendants only insofar as those services relate to the defendants’ infringing listings and their offering for sale and/or sale of counterfeit products.

The court stated that this modification was without prejudice to renewing the original, broader request. It explained that the current application did not support relief that would broadly prevent online storefronts from providing any services to the defendants. The court relied on the principle that injunctive relief must be narrowly tailored to specific legal violations and must not impose unnecessary burdens on lawful activity.

Effect of the Order

The order grants the application with a narrower scope than requested. It does not state that the defendants may be prevented from using the online storefronts for unrelated lawful products or activities, and it does not resolve the underlying infringement claims on the merits. Judge Lewis J. Liman signed the order for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.