4:25-cv-11363
E.D. Mich.Jun 3, 2025Background
- Bravado International Group sued unnamed defendants for trademark infringement related to unauthorized sales of merchandise outside Post Malone concerts.
- The lawsuit initially sought a nationwide injunction to seize counterfeit goods at all tour stops.
- The court granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) for the Detroit concert only, not nationwide relief.
- No defendants were identified or appeared at the preliminary injunction hearing, and Bravado could not provide any identifying information for the John Doe defendants.
- Bravado argued that bootleggers were acting in concert nationwide, justifying broader injunctive relief.
- The court denied further injunctive relief, questioned its jurisdiction over unidentified defendants, and ordered Bravado to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of a justiciable controversy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nationwide Injunction Against Does | All bootleggers are acting jointly; broad relief warranted. | Not present/identified; court lacks jurisdiction. | Denied: Court lacks jurisdiction and proper notice. |
| Use of John Doe Defendants | Placeholder allowed to proceed against unknown infringers. | John Doe use cannot perpetuate indefinite proceedings. | Denied: Placeholder cannot permit indefinite suits. |
| Procedural Due Process | Service on Detroit Does suffices for noticed nationwide. | Absence of identified/served defendants. | Relief denied: Due process not satisfied. |
| Justiciable Controversy | Ongoing nationwide conduct shows a live controversy. | No defendants, event passed—no real case remains. | May not be justiciable; plaintiff must show cause. |
Key Cases Cited
- Plant v. Doe, 19 F. Supp. 2d 1316 (S.D. Fla. 1998) (use of John Doe defendants is disfavored and not a means for broad, indefinite injunctions)
- Hybe Co. v. Does 1-100, 598 F. Supp. 3d 1005 (D. Nev. 2022) (district courts lack power to enjoin unnamed, unserved parties)
- Commodities Exp. Co. v. Detroit Int'l Bridge Co., 695 F.3d 518 (6th Cir. 2012) (federal courts require a live case or controversy to exercise jurisdiction)