Zhu v. The Partnerships, Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
1:25-cv-22251
S.D. Fla.Jul 3, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Enlai Zhu owns the federally registered trademark SHANGGUAN, used mainly for towel products, including compressed travel and facial towels.
- Zhu filed suit against a large group of defendants operating e-commerce stores (identified on Schedule A), primarily for selling products bearing counterfeit copies of the SHANGGUAN mark.
- The complaint alleges that none of the defendants are authorized to use or sell genuine SHANGGUAN products and that their activities are consistent with online counterfeiting.
- Plaintiff filed an ex parte (without notice) application seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) and asset restraint to prevent defendants from transferring funds and continuing alleged infringement.
- Evidence included declarations and exhibits showing sales, advertising, and product listings using the contested trademark, with risk of asset transfer if notice was provided.
- The court analyzed the TRO request under federal standards for preliminary injunctive relief and granted the order, temporarily enjoining all identified defendants and freezing assets.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Likelihood of success on the merits | Zhu argues strong likelihood of proving consumer confusion & counterfeiting. | Not addressed at TRO stage | Court agreed: likely success |
| Irreparable harm | Zhu asserts immediate, irreparable injury without a TRO due to continued infringement and asset dissipation. | Not addressed at TRO stage | Court agreed: irreparable harm |
| Balance of hardships | Zhu claims harm to reputation and loss of sales outweighs defendant's potential harm from restraint. | Not addressed at TRO stage | Court agreed: balance favors Zhu |
| Public interest | Zhu claims public interest supports TRO to protect consumers and legal trademarks. | Not addressed at TRO stage | Court agreed: favors TRO |
Key Cases Cited
- Schiavo ex rel. Schindler v. Schiavo, 403 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2005) (sets the standard for preliminary injunctive and TRO relief)
- Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters, 415 U.S. 423 (U.S. 1974) (ex parte restraining orders should preserve the status quo only briefly)
- Reebok Int’l, Ltd. v. Marnatech Enters., Inc., 970 F.2d 552 (9th Cir. 1992) (equitable accounting for profits in a trademark case under the Lanham Act)
- Levi Strauss & Co. v. Sunrise Int’l Trading Inc., 51 F.3d 982 (11th Cir. 1995) (upholding district court’s power to freeze assets to assure availability of final relief)
- Fuller Brush Prods. Co. v. Fuller Brush Co., 299 F.2d 772 (7th Cir. 1962) (distinction between accounting for profits and damages in trademark claims)
- Federal Trade Commission v. United States Oil & Gas Corp., 748 F.2d 1431 (11th Cir. 1984) (court’s inherent equitable powers to issue asset freezes)