Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 26, 2024

XYZ Corp. v. Individuals

Full caption

XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A to the Complaint

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:24-cv-01962
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, Judge Schofield adjourned the hearing and required corporate defendants to retain counsel.

Who this affects

XYZ Corp. and the defendants identified in Schedule A, including the corporate defendants whose representatives appeared without lawyers and the remaining defendants who still had to be served.

What happened

XYZ Corp. sued 107 defendants, alleging they infringed its trademark for artwork. The court had previously granted XYZ Corp.’s request for temporary emergency restrictions and scheduled a hearing on a possible preliminary injunction.

At the hearing, three individuals appeared for some corporate defendants, but those defendants did not have lawyers. The court said corporations may appear in federal court only through licensed attorneys.

Judge Schofield ordered XYZ Corp. to confer with those three defendants and file a status letter. She also adjourned the hearing to May 15, 2024, and required XYZ Corp. to serve the order and earlier orders on the remaining defendants and file proof of service.

The detailed version

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

Case
XYZ Corp. v. Individuals · No. 1:24-cv-01962
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Apr. 26, 2024

Background

XYZ Corp. sued 107 defendants, alleging that they infringed XYZ Corp.’s trademark for its artwork. XYZ Corp. previously asked for several emergency measures, including a temporary restraining order, restrictions on the defendants’ online storefronts and certain assets, permission for expedited discovery, and an order requiring the defendants to explain why a preliminary injunction should not issue.

On March 18, 2024, the court granted that application and scheduled a hearing. The hearing was later postponed several times. At the hearing, XYZ Corp. appeared through counsel. Three individuals appeared on behalf of certain corporate defendants, but none of those defendants appeared through counsel. The hearing was postponed to give those defendants time to obtain lawyers or resolve the matter with XYZ Corp.

Court’s Orders

Judge Lorna G. Schofield stated that a corporation may appear in federal court only through a licensed attorney and may not represent itself. The court ordered XYZ Corp. to confer with the three defendants for whom individuals appeared and file a status letter by May 1, 2024, describing the progress of those discussions. The defendants were advised that they must retain counsel in order to appear in the case.

The court further adjourned the hearing to May 15, 2024, at 3:50 p.m. XYZ Corp. was ordered to serve this order and all prior orders on the remaining defendants by May 3, 2024, using the same method used to serve each defendant with the complaint, and to file a certificate of service by May 4, 2024.

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.