{"cached_at":"2026-10-12T10:42:41.316800+00:00","cl_docket_id":"71574995","docket":{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","id":71574995,"court":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/courts/txnd/","court_id":"txnd","original_court_info":null,"idb_data":null,"clusters":[],"audio_files":[],"assigned_to":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/people/14421/","referred_to":null,"bankruptcy_information":null,"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-07T13:42:20.092788-07:00","date_modified":"2026-10-06T14:24:55.537197-07:00","source":1,"appeal_from_str":"","assigned_to_str":"Ada Brown","referred_to_str":"","panel_str":"","date_last_index":null,"date_cert_granted":null,"date_cert_denied":null,"date_argued":null,"date_reargued":null,"date_reargument_denied":null,"date_filed":"2025-10-07","date_terminated":null,"date_last_filing":"2026-10-06","case_name_short":"","case_name":"Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc v. Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC","case_name_full":"","slug":"spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of","docket_number":"3:25-cv-02727","docket_number_core":"2502727","docket_number_raw":"3:25-cv-02727","docket_number_source":0,"federal_dn_office_code":"3","federal_dn_case_type":"cv","federal_dn_judge_initials_assigned":"E","federal_dn_judge_initials_referred":"","federal_defendant_number":null,"pacer_case_id":"410141","cause":"15:1121 Trademark Infringement","nature_of_suit":"840 Property Rights: Trademark","jury_demand":"Plaintiff","jurisdiction_type":"Federal Question","appellate_fee_status":"","appellate_case_type_information":"","mdl_status":"","filepath_ia":"","filepath_ia_json":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"ia_needs_upload":true,"ia_date_first_change":"2025-10-07T13:42:20.086195-07:00","date_blocked":null,"blocked":false,"appeal_from":null,"parent_docket":null,"tags":[],"panel":[]},"parties":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/16606957/","id":16606957,"attorneys":[],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","docket_id":71574995,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:04.939541-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:04.939565-07:00","name":"Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/16606956/","id":16606956,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10834840/","attorney_id":10834840,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","docket_id":71574995,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10834840/","attorney_id":10834840,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","docket_id":71574995,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10834841/","attorney_id":10834841,"date_action":"2025-11-14","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","docket_id":71574995,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10834841/","attorney_id":10834841,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","docket_id":71574995,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","docket_id":71574995,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:04.342300-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:04.342324-07:00","name":"Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc","extra_info":""}],"entries":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/480708170/","id":480708170,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/496421580/","id":496421580,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/19/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-10-06T14:13:12.564983-07:00","date_modified":"2026-10-06T14:24:55.487756-07:00","sha1":"c060c770c6962a96bd50f2501ded82708f9fe11c","page_count":12,"file_size":801893,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.19.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 1 of 12 PageID 113\n FILED\n IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 5, 2026\n FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS KAREN MITCHELL\n DALLAS DIVISION\n CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT\n COURT\n SPECIAL ORDER NO. 3-364\n\n The cases listed on Exhibit A to this order are transferred to Judge Kasdin M. Mitchell\u2019s\n\ndocket, until and unless modified by subsequent order of the court, and shall be designated by the\n\nsuffix letter \u201cM\u201d.\n\n The cases listed on Exhibit B to this order are transferred to Chief Judge Reed O\u2019Connor\u2019s\n\ndocket, until and unless modified by subsequent order of the court, and shall be designated by the\n\nsuffix letter \u201cO\u201d.\n\n SO ORDERED.\n\n October 5, 2026\n\n\n\n\n __________________________________\n REED O\u2019CONNOR\n CHIEF JUDGE\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 2 of 12 PageID 114\n Exhibit A\n\n\n\n CIVIL CASES TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE DOCKET OF JUDGE KASDIN M.\n MITCHELL\n1 3:24-cv-02895-E Reed v. John Doe 1 et al\n2 3:24-cv-02967-E-BN Ray-Sampson v. Uplift Education et al\n3 3:24-cv-03059-E Jones v. Holcim SOR Inc\n4 3:24-cv-03226-E *SEALED*\n5 3:24-cv-03270-E Regalo International LLC et al v. Aborder Products Inc\n6 3:25-cv-00184-E Johnson v. The Elevance Health Companies Inc\n7 3:25-cv-00415-E Bulldog National Risk Retention Group Inc v. All Points 360 LLC et al\n8 3:25-cv-00585-E Perkins, M.D. v. BMW of North America LLC\n9 3:25-cv-00626-E Carroll v. Graphic Packaging International LLC\n10 3:25-cv-00675-E Rothchild et al v. Lemonade Insurance Company\n11 3:25-cv-00694-E Innovative Sports Management Inc v. Tineo Peruvian Cafe LLC et al\n12 3:25-cv-00890-E Legacy Diagnostic Lab LLC v. Kennedy\n13 3:25-cv-00895-E Seidel v. Neugebauer et al\n14 3:25-cv-00914-E Savage v. Smoky Rose LLC\n15 3:25-cv-01016-E Parviz v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc\n16 3:25-cv-01056-E-BT Hayes et al v. PHH Mortgage Corporation et al\n17 3:25-cv-01161-E Guerrero v. Yamaha Motor Corporation USA et al\n18 3:25-cv-01228-E Otunba v. USA\n19 3:25-cv-01238-E Parmerlee et al v. United States of America\n20 3:25-cv-01459-E Valtir Rentals LLC v. Executive Risk Indemnity Inc\n21 3:25-cv-01465-E *SEALED*\n22 3:25-cv-01475-E Seidell et al v. Chapman and Culter LLP et al\n23 3:25-cv-01538-E Maryland et al v. Marriott International, Inc. et al\n24 3:25-cv-01588-E Conley v. Standard Logistics Transportation, LLC\n25 3:25-cv-01615-E Methodist Healthcare System of San Antonio Ltd LLP et al v.\n Community Insurance Company\n26 3:25-cv-01648-E-BW Braga v. Devon Bank\n27 3:25-cv-01690-E-BW Hunsinger v. Doe Corporation\n28 3:25-cv-01691-E LightSure LLC v. Acuity Brands Inc\n29 3:25-cv-01806-E Tanner v. Joseph et al\n30 3:25-cv-01808-E-BW Zhou v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Texas Service\n Center\n31 3:25-cv-01825-E Coria et al v. Allen et al\n32 3:25-cv-01828-E-BT Carter v. Director, TDCJ-CID\n33 3:25-cv-01866-E Escamilla v. Costco Wholesale Corporation\n34 3:25-cv-02069-E Delaware Life Insurance Company v. Brennan et al\n35 3:25-cv-02102-E-BW Douglas v. Amazon.com Services LLC\n36 3:25-cv-02122-E Harris v. Kroger Texas LP et al\n37 3:25-cv-02188-E-BN Johnson v. Midland Credit Management Inc et al\n38 3:25-cv-02251-E Eitel v. Banc Card of America et al\n39 3:25-cv-02266-E-BN Kriman v. Office Depot LLC et al\n40 3:25-cv-02280-E Hubbard v. Auto Now Financial Services TX, Inc. et al\n41 3:25-cv-02289-E Frisk v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration\n42 3:25-cv-02323-E G&C Food Distributors & Brokers Inc v. Base Carriers LLC, et al.\n43 3:25-cv-02378-E Reyna v. United States of America et al\n44 3:25-cv-02556-E McDonald v. International Business Machines\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 3 of 12 PageID 115\n Exhibit A\n\n45 3:25-cv-02584-E Daugherty et al v. Highland Capital Management, L.P. et al\n46 3:25-cv-02595-E Solidaris Capital LLC v. Kingswood Capital Partners LLC\n47 3:25-cv-02601-E United Security Financial Corp v. Hawes et al\n48 3:25-cv-02670-E-BT Cowans v. Moneygram Payment Systems Inc\n49 3:25-cv-02679-E Webb et al v. Travelers Personal Insurance Company\n50 3:25-cv-02693-E Boyce v. Panda Express Inc\n51 3:25-cv-02711-E Blue v. PetSmart LLC et al\n52 3:25-cv-02716-E Atkinson v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Company et al\n53 3:25-cv-02721-E Lindsay-Blee Americas LLC v. Alquimia Energy LLC et al\n54 3:25-cv-02722-E Haid v. Garland Independent School District et al\n55 3:25-cv-02727-E Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc v. Spaghetti Warehouse\n Restaurant of CNY LLC\n56 3:25-cv-02830-E McNeely et al v. Equifax Information Services LLC et al\n57 3:25-cv-02852-E-BW White v. DB Schenker Inc\n58 3:25-cv-02914-E-BW Marques v. Noem et al\n59 3:25-cv-03000-E-BT Todd v. 423 Catkins Maize LLC et al\n60 3:25-cv-03037-E Church Mutual Insurance Company v. Gateway Church et al\n61 3:25-cv-03076-E Catabia v. Doctors Alliance, LLC et al\n62 3:25-cv-03126-E EBG LLC et al v. Eatz Grill LLC et al\n63 3:25-cv-03179-E-BW Keech et al v. Payovich et al\n64 3:25-cv-03236-E *SEALED*\n65 3:25-cv-03254-E Baker v. Tow Star Inc\n66 3:25-cv-03257-E-BW Shaw v. Ampex Brands\n67 3:25-cv-03304-E Dallas, Garland & Northeastern Railroad, INC v. EM Resources LLC\n68 3:25-cv-03318-E-BK Rooters et al v. Dallas County Texas et al\n69 3:25-cv-03331-E Cook v. Paychex, Inc.\n70 3:25-cv-03387-E Everett Financial Inc v. Mau et al\n71 3:25-cv-03389-E Dorsainville v. Santander Consumer USA Inc. et al\n72 3:25-cv-03395-E-BN Wilson v. Brown et al\n73 3:25-cv-03405-E Arise Recovery Centers of America LLC v. Bessent\n74 3:25-cv-03424-E Reid v. GameSquare Holdings Inc et al\n75 3:25-cv-03465-E-BT Rogers v. Envision Dallas\n76 3:25-cv-03476-E Herrera v. American Security Insurance Company\n77 3:25-cv-03518-E Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe subscriber assigned IP address\n 99.113.183.237\n78 3:25-cr-03528-E Sheffield-Ocampo v. Ma et al\n79 3:25-cv-03545-E Quesenberry et al v. Choice Business Group LLC\n80 3:25-cv-03546-E Quesenberry et al v. Prompt Courier & Notary Service Inc\n81 3:25-cv-03559-E-BW Kolobotos v. Lin\n82 3:26-cv-00002-E Altera Digital Health Inc et al v. Prospect Medical Holdings Inc et al\n83 3:26-cv-00036-E Johnson v. Kroger Texas LP\n84 3:26-cv-00050-E-BK Stevens v. The City of Addison Texas et al\n85 3:26-cv-00095-E Hinojosa v. Allstate Vehicle and Property Insurance Company\n86 3:26-cv-00106-E Brannon v. Walmart Inc et al\n87 3:26-cv-00110-E-BN Bell v. Experian Information Solutions Inc et al\n88 3:26-cv-00128-E Faz v. USA\n89 3:26-cv-00165-E DSI Distributing Inc v. Presidio Networked Solutions Group LLC\n90 3:26-cv-00190-E-BT Moses v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs\n91 3:26-cv-00252-E-BT Verser et al v. CitiMortgage Inc\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 4 of 12 PageID 116\n Exhibit A\n\n92 3:26-cv-00278-E Independent Bank v. Yuejie Inc\n93 3:26-cv-00287-E-BN Fenimore v. City of Mesquite Texas et al\n94 3:26-cv-00295-E Trinity North American Freight Car Inc v. GPO Asociados SA de CV\n95 3:26-cv-00320-E-BN Foreman v. HealthTrust Workforce Solutions LLC\n96 3:26-cv-00339-E Schneider v. Third Coast Insurance Company\n97 3:26-cv-00353-E Alo LLC v. Carpio et al\n98 3:26-cv-00368-E Cohere Beauty Omaha Inc v. Cali-Curl Inc\n99 3:26-cv-00381-E Koch v. Verkada Inc\n100 3:26-cv-00404-E Clay v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit Police et al\n101 3:26-cv-00408-E First Southern Bank Texarkana v. Lankford et al\n102 3:26-cv-00537-E-BK Wickman v. Thompson et al\n103 3:26-cv-00550-E Alo LLC V. Arturo Arzola\n104 3:26-cv-00551-E Nations Fund I LLC v. Enercorp Crane & Energy Services LLC et al\n105 3:26-cv-00554-E Mejia v. Kemper Independence Insurance Company\n106 3:26-cv-00555-E-BK Johnny Collins v. Elite Edge Management Group LLC et al\n107 3:26-cv-00561-E Oliff v. United States of America\n108 3:26-cv-00590-E Grinnan et al v. MTD Products Inc et al\n109 3:26-cv-00646-E Dubo v. USCIS et al\n110 3:26-cv-00674-E Gomez Munoz v. USA\n111 3:26-cv-00686-E Global Weather Productions LLC v. Cumulus Media Inc.\n112 3:26-cv-00698-E-BK Wilson v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit et al\n113 3:26-cv-00733-E FML DAL LLC v. Cowan Intermodal Group LLC\n114 3:26-cv-00740-E Jeewani et al v. Bondi et al\n115 3:26-cv-00742-E Gnaedig v. Monterey Financial Services Inc\n116 3:26-cv-00761-E ANS Advanced Network Services LLC v. Molle Energy Construction\n Services LLC et al\n117 3:26-cv-00776-E Marrero v. U.S. Xpress Inc\n118 3:26-cv-00813-E-BK Simbeck v. Dallas Independent School District et al\n119 3:26-cv-00829-E G. Cole Corporation v. Hanover Atlantic Insurance Company\n120 3:26-cv-00867-E-BN Contreras-Molina v. Warden Prairieland Detention Center et al\n\n121 3:26-cv-00872-E-BN Varona et al v. Facility Administrator/Warden, Prairieland Detention\n Facility et al\n122 3:26-cv-00877-E-BN Singh v. Warden of the Prairieland Detention Center et al\n123 3:26-cv-00921-E Cuhadar et al v. Savoya LLC\n124 3:26-cv-00934-E *SEALED*\n125 3:26-cv-00965-E-BW Fernandez-Fernandez v. Warden Prairieland Detention Center et al\n126 3:26-cv-01030-E Mikel v. American Wind Transport Group LLC\n127 3:26-cv-01055-E Jennings v. FCA US LLC\n128 3:26-cv-01062-E Hardin v. Truck Up LLC et al\n129 3:26-cv-01096-E In re Earthbound Holding, LLC Data Breach Litigation\n130 3:26-cv-01107-E Womack et al v. City of Irving\n131 3:26-cv-01109-E-BW Farlough v. Director, TDCJ-CID\n132 3:26-cv-01131-E Gaytan v. Panda Express Inc\n133 3:26-cv-01146-E Miniefield v. Ashimary International Trading LLC\n134 3:26-cv-01187-E Cornerstone Crossroads Academy v. Scottsdale Insurance Company\n135 3:26-cv-01207-E-BT Watson v. Tranzact Inc\n136 3:26-cv-01224-E Ahmad v. State Farm Lloyds\n137 3:26-cv-01237-E-BW Uchenna Chidi v Warden of the Prairieland Detention Center\n138 3:26-cv-01256-E-BN Hilary v. Cerna et al\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 5 of 12 PageID 117\n Exhibit A\n\n139 3:26-cv-01292-E-BN Moore v. Amazon.com Services LLC\n140 3:26-cv-01385-E Kirkbride v. Legkoev et al\n141 3:26-cv-01397-E-BW Ramirez v. FMRI/C.O.M.M.\n142 3:26-cv-01419-E-BW Sterrenberg v. Willow Bridge Property Company et al\n143 3:26-cv-01438-E Bland v. Thryv Inc\n144 3:26-cv-01445-E Parra v. USA\n145 3:26-cv-01447-E-BN Hernandez Alcala v. Warden Prairieland Detention Center et al\n146 3:26-cv-01467-E Caywood v. DRG Hospitality LLC et al\n147 3:26-cv-01471-E Fabry v. AmeriHome Mortgage Company LLC et al\n148 3:26-cv-01547-E Specialty Exotics LLC v. Motor Cars Inc\n149 3:26-cv-01575-E-BN Calhoun v. Steiner\n150 3:26-cv-01578-E Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe\n151 3:26-cv-01581-E Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe\n152 3:26-cv-01603-E Meachum et al v. The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company NA\n153 3:26-cv-01608-E Ciufi v. Gamez et al\n154 3:26-cv-01640-E Mack v. Washington\n155 3:26-cv-01671-E Dealer Support Network LLC v. Foundation Automotive Corporation\n et al\n156 3:26-cv-01680-E Reyes-Gonzalez v. USA\n157 3:26-cv-01689-E-BN Kulendran v. of Prairieland Detention Facility et al\n158 3:26-cv-01698-E-BK Manning v. JPMorgan Chase Bank NA et al\n159 3:26-cv-01722-E-BN Alvarez v. Loan Depot\n160 3:26-cv-01750-E Anderson v. Equifax Information Services LLC et al\n161 3:26-cv-01761-E Loiseau v. Equifax Information Services LLC et al\n162 3:26-cv-01794-E Wyland v. Federation Internationale de Football Association et al\n163 3:26-cv-01815-E *SEALED*\n164 3:26-cv-01818-E-BN Sudarshan v. Bargami\n165 3:26-cv-01842-E Green Revolution Cooling Inc v. Riot Platforms Inc et al\n166 3:26-cv-01875-E Laccinole v. Strategic Funding Group LLC\n167 3:26-cv-01880-E Mosqueda v. Equifax Information Services LLC\n168 3:26-cv-01925-E-BN Isidro-Polocena v. Mullin et al\n169 3:26-cv-01951-E VSS Carriers Inc v. The Travelers Lloyds Insurance Company\n170 3:26-cv-01954-E Songer v. Allstate Indemnity Company\n171 3:26-cv-01955-E-BK Graim v. Gables Residential Services Inc\n172 3:26-cv-01969-E JWM Ventures LLC v. Nasser Investments Inc et al\n173 3:26-cv-01970-E OrthoMed Staffing PLLC v. Astar et al\n174 3:26-cv-01989-E Burrow v. Allstate Vehicle and Property Insurance Company\n175 3:26-cv-02002-E-BN Williams v. Warden Pate- FCI Seagoville\n176 3:26-cv-02028-E McField-Bent v. United States of America\n177 3:26-cv-02044-E Pate v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company\n178 3:26-cv-02057-E McLane Food Service Inc v. Total Quality Logistics, LLC\n179 3:26-cv-02080-E-BN Ali v. Facility Administrator et al\n180 3:26-cv-02086-E-BN Allen-Straight v. Johnson County Sheriff\n181 3:26-cv-02093-E Cebey Matos v. Mullin et al\n182 3:26-cv-02095-E Reyes-Gonzalez v. USA\n183 3:26-cv-02119-E Sambol v. United States Department of Housing and Urban\n Development\n184 3:26-cv-02125-E-BK Benitez v. Warden of Carswell FMC\n185 3:26-cv-02132-E-BW Ford v. LNU\n186 3:26-cv-02153-E-BW Centeno v. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 6 of 12 PageID 118\n Exhibit A\n\n187 3:26-cv-02191-E Shabauze v. Walmart Inc\n188 3:26-cv-02236-E-BT Ash v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company\n189 3:26-cv-02237-E Knight v. James et al\n190 3:26-cv-02240-E HomeVestors of America Inc v. Ridgeline Investments LLC et al\n191 3:26-cv-02270-E-BN Harding v. Kirkendall Dwyer LLP\n192 3:26-cv-02273-E Reinsmith et al v. State Farm Lloyds et al\n193 3:26-cv-02274-E Sandoval v. RealPage Inc\n194 3:26-cv-02280-E Mid-Continent Casualty Company v. Evanston Insurance Company\n195 3:26-cv-02283-E *SEALED*\n196 3:26-cv-02284-E-BT Kinnison v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration\n197 3:26-cv-02288-E-BW Canlson v. Cerna et al\n198 3:26-cv-02306-E Photon Interactive Services Inc v. Sharma\n199 3:26-cv-02311-E-BW Huynh v. Blanche et al\n200 3:26-cv-02336-E-BN Mejia Galviz v. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement\n201 3:26-cv-02380-E-BN Paris v. Carmax Enterprise Services LLC et al\n202 3:26-cv-02382-E-BW Apte v. Director Texas Service Center et al\n203 3:26-cv-02385-E Arnold v. Gamble et al\n204 3:26-cv-02399-E Hartford Fire Insurance Company et al v. Unifeye Vision Partners\n Holdings LLC\n205 3:26-cv-02400-E Nutmeg Insurance Company et al v. Harwood International\n206 3:26-cv-02414-E Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe\n207 3:26-cv-02446-E Nukala v. Mullin et al\n208 3:26-cv-02449-E-BN Martinez Chavez v. MULLIN et al\n209 3:26-cv-02454-E-BT King v. Warden Pate FCI Seagoville\n210 3:26-cv-02459-E-BN Merten v. US Citizenship and Immigration Services et al\n211 3:26-cv-02479-E-BW Vanzant v. Lewis et al\n212 3:26-cv-02511-E Denbow v. Travelers Personal Insurance Company\n213 3:26-cv-02534-E Owen-Brooks v. AffordaCare Insurance Agency LLC\n214 3:26-cv-02545-E Peavler v. Donahue et al\n215 3:26-cv-02548-E Pugh v. Nelson University\n216 3:26-cv-02590-E Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. KLLM Transport\n Services LLC et al\n217 3:26-cv-02604-E Hangzhou Sanuoge Trading Co Ltd v. Sportspower Ltd\n218 3:26-cv-02611-E DFW Stucco Pros LLC v. Hiscox Insurance Company Inc\n219 3:26-cv-02614-E United States of America v. All funds seized from the Resource One\n Credit Union Account Number 3017209 Held in the Name of GG Tree\n Unlimited LLC\n220 3:26-cv-02625-E-BT Delaney v. Telsco Industries Inc\n221 3:26-cv-02634-E Barbara v. BLC Transportation Inc et al\n222 3:26-cv-02640-E Watkins et al v. Rocket Mortgage LLC\n223 3:26-cv-02641-E-BT Durr v. Greystar Worldwide LLC\n224 3:26-cv-02642-E Daniels v. Aramark Management Services Limited Partnership\n225 3:26-cv-02678-E Everbank NA v. Resource One Credit Union\n226 3:26-cv-02687-E The Apostolic Church Glorious Vision (USA) Dallas Assembly v.\n Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company\n227 3:26-cv-02697-E Trevino v. Wellpoint Texas Inc\n228 3:26-cv-02749-E-BT Biswas v. Redsail Technologies et al\n229 3:26-cv-02756-E Padron v. Singh et al\n230 3:26-cv-02764-E Bonikela v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 7 of 12 PageID 119\n Exhibit A\n\n231 3:26-cv-02780-E Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe\n232 3:26-cv-02784-E United States of America v. Altruist Home Health Care Inc\n233 3:26-cv-02813-E Koritala v. Edlow\n234 3:26-cv-02841-E Baker v. Schneider National Carriers Inc et al\n235 3:26-cv-02867-E-BN Nguyen v. Prairieland Detention Center\n236 3:26-cv-02872-E Cognetta v. Express Systems, Inc.\n237 3:26-cv-02875-E McCarty v. Western Mutual Insurance Company\n238 3:26-cv-02878-E-BN Gakou v. Warden Prairieland Detention Center et al\n239 3:26-cv-02904-E Commercial Capital Funding LLC v. Alexander et al\n240 3:26-cv-02908-E-BN Mohammadi v. Warden Prairieland Detention Center et al\n241 3:26-cv-02917-E Davis v. BOPC, LLC\n242 3:26-cv-02944-E-BN Poovannumvila v. Collins\n243 3:26-cv-02947-E Chaturvedi v. Allen et al\n244 3:26-cv-02986-E-BW Warren v. State of Texas\n245 3:26-cv-02994-E Daley et al v. Five Rivers Freights LLC et al\n246 3:26-cv-03021-E-BT Hall v. Molina Healthcare Inc\n247 3:26-cv-03023-E-BW Nyonee v. O'Brien et al\n248 3:26-cv-03024-E Moffitt v. Neighborhood Credit Union\n249 3:26-cv-03047-E-BK Hunsinger v. United Airlines Inc\n250 3:26-cv-03053-E-BK Johnson v. Director, TDCJ-CID\n251 3:26-cv-03071-E-BW Prieto Antillano v. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement\n252 3:26-cv-03075-E Dennis v. T-Mobile USA Inc\n253 3:26-cv-03076-E Reid v. Encompass Independent Insurance Company\n254 3:26-cv-03081-E Cook v. United Check Recovery Bureau Inc\n255 3:26-cv-03089-E Redd v. Credence Resource Management LLC\n256 3:26-cv-03107-E-BW Whitney v. Amazon.com Services LLC\n257 3:26-cv-03132-E-BW Acosta-Chirino v. Warden Facility Administrator P\n258 3:26-cv-03144-E Freeland v. Greyhound Lines Inc\n259 3:26-cv-03151-E Jayaraman v. Edlow\n260 3:26-cv-03173-E Kazi v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services et al\n261 3:26-cv-03185-E-BK Modasia v. Rubio et al\n262 3:26-cv-03187-E-BN Green v. LNU\n263 3:26-cv-03196-E Cano v. USA\n264 3:26-cv-03206-E-BN John v. US Bank Trust National Association\n265 3:26-cv-03213-E-BN Taylor v. City of Dallas et al\n266 3:26-cv-03219-E McCarty v. Life Insurance Company of North America\n267 3:26-cv-03229-E Woodlee v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation\n268 3:26-cv-03313-E Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe\n269 3:26-cv-03391-E-BW Bowers v. The United States of America\n270 3:26-cv-03402-E Stewart v. Essilorluxottica USA Inc et al\n271 3:26-cv-03404-E E.R. v. Garland Independent School District\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 8 of 12 PageID 120 Exhibit A\n\n CRIMINAL CASES TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE DOCKET OF JUDGE KASDIN M.\n MITCHELL\n1 3:22-cr-00432-E USA v. Dowdy, et al.\n2 3:23-cr-00381-E USA v. Roberts, et al.\n3 3:24-cr-00021-E USA v. Massington\n4 3:24-cr-00064-E USA v. White\n5 3:24-cr-00221-E USA v. Ray, et al.\n6 3:24-cr-00444-E USA v. Nguyen, et al.\n7 3:24-cr-00551-E USA v. Verges\n8 3:25-cr-00130-E USA v. Khan\n9 3:25-cr-00233-E USA v. Hughes\n10 3:25-cr-00244-E USA v. Blount\n11 3:25-cr-00255-E USA v. Pedraza\n12 3:25-cr-00297-E USA v. Sereseroz, et al.\n13 3:25-cr-00308-E USA v. Cardenas\n14 3:25-cr-00322-E USA v. Munoz-Espinoza, et al.\n15 3:25-cr-00345-E USA v. Amin\n16 3:25-cr-00346-E USA v. Arterburn\n17 3:25-cr-00380-E USA v. James\n18 3:25-cr-00383-E USA v. Aguilar\n19 3:25-cr-00389-E USA v. Thursby et al\n20 3:25-cr-00394-E USA v. Sanders\n21 3:25-cr-00399-E USA v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation\n22 3:25-cr-00404-E USA v. Enriquez-Villa\n23 3:25-cr-00435-E USA v. Hagerman\n24 3:25-cr-00455-E USA v. Aguilar et al\n25 3:25-cr-00489-E USA v. Layne\n26 3:25-cr-00530-E USA v. Gonzalez Torres\n27 3:25-cr-00533-E USA v. Garcia et al\n28 3:25-cr-00567-E USA v. Varela et al\n29 3:26-cr-00043-E USA v. Daniel et al\n30 3:26-cr-00047-E USA v. Betford et al\n31 3:26-cr-00080-E USA v. Soto-Velasquez\n32 3:26-cr-00095-E USA v. Ford\n33 3:26-cr-00101-E USA v. Amaya-Castillo\n34 3:26-cr-00109-E USA v. Martin\n35 3:26-cr-00110-E USA v. Boyd\n36 3:26-cr-00143-E USA v. Carter et al\n37 3:26-cr-00146-E USA v. Ortiz-Rodriguez\n38 3:26-cr-00147-E USA v. Umanzor-Cardenas\n39 3:26-cr-00153-E USA v. Badillo et al\n40 3:26-cr-00168-E USA v. Lemus\n41 3:26-cr-00185-E USA v. Inestroza-Calix\n42 3:26-cr-00189-E USA v. Reza-Triana\n43 3:26-cr-00193-E USA v. Ceballos-Bautista\n44 3:26-cr-00195-E USA v. Avery\n45 3:26-cr-00208-E USA v. Baca\n46 3:26-cr-00220-E USA v. Davis\n47 3:26-cr-00244-E USA v. Alegria\n48 3:26-cr-00246-E USA v. Diaz et al\n49 3:26-cr-00251-E USA v. Coakley\n50 3:26-cr-00255-E USA v. McGregor\n51 3:26-cr-00257-E USA v. Jackson\n52 3:26-cr-00274-E USA v. Harris\n\n 1\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 9 of 12 PageID 121 Exhibit A\n53 3:26-cr-00277-E USA v. Banks\n54 3:26-cr-00282-E USA v. Maduka\n55 3:26-cr-00283-E USA v. SEALED\n56 3:26-cr-00296-E USA v. Rojas-Reynoso\n57 3:26-cr-00312-E USA v. Martinez\n58 3:26-cr-00342-E USA v. Johnson\n59 3:26-cr-00349-E USA v. Ochoa-Madera\n60 3:26-cr-00358-E USA v. SEALED\n61 3:26-cr-00361-E USA v. Rodriguez\n62 3:26-cr-00368-E USA v. Tasby\n63 3:26-cr-00371-E USA v. Villagran-Aguilar\n64 3:26-cr-00397-E USA v. Lopez-Cisneros\n65 3:26-cr-00409-E USA v. Lemus Jr.\n66 3:26-cr-00422-E USA v. Pena-Rodarte\n67 3:26-cr-00423-E USA v. Huffman\n68 3:26-cr-00446-E USA v. Rodriguez\n69 3:26-cr-00446-E USA v. Solorio-Delgado\n70 3:26-cr-00456-E USA v. Martinez-Martinez\n71 3:26-cr-00467-E USA v. Dominguez Martinez\n72 3:26-cr-00469-E USA v. Reyes-Ochoa\n73 3:26-cr-00506-E USA v. Onofre-Navarrete\n74 3:26-cr-00514-E USA v. Crear\n75 3:26-cr-00521-E USA v. Pacheco\n76 3:26-cr-00542-E USA v. Lopez-Arvizu\n77 3:26-cr-00555-E USA v. Locke\n78 3:26-cr-00573-E USA v. Taylor\n79 3:26-cr-00599-E USA v. Herrera-Chavez\n80 3:26-cr-00604-E USA v. Gonzalez-Gonzalez\n81 3:26-cr-00605-E USA v. Patino-Bautista\n82 3:26-cr-00607-E USA v. Esquivel-Moreno\n83 3:26-cr-00614-E USA v. Briones-Garcia\n84 3:26-cr-00616-E USA v. Amos\n85 3:26-cr-00627-E USA v. Gallegos\n86 3:26-cr-00630-E USA v. Pena-Rodarte et al.\n87 3:26-cr-00632-E USA v. Diaz-Reyes\n88 3:26-cr-00645-E USA v. SEALED\n89 3:26-cr-00648-E USA v. Gueye, et al.\n90 3:26-cr-00649-E USA v. SEALED\n91 3:26-cr-00655-E USA v. Blalock\n92 3:26-cr-00659-E USA v. Hernandez-Velasco\n93 3:26-cr-00666-E USA v. Rivera-Saravia\n94 3:26-cr-00673-E USA v. Martinez-Beristain\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 10 of 12 PageID 122\n Exhibit B\n\n\n\n CIVIL CASES TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE DOCKET OF CHIEF JUDGE REED\n O'CONNOR\n1 3:18-cv-00037-E Butler v. Collins et al\n2 3:18-cv-03308-E Kelson et al v. City of Dallas et al\n3 3:19-cv-02857-E Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) v. United States\n Department of Health and Human Services et al\n4 3:20-cv-02927-E ERNearMe Plano LLC et al v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas\n5 3:22-cv-00514-E Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Allure Jazz & Cigars, LLC et al\n6 3:22-cv-00706-E Hopkins v. Department of Defense\n7 3:22-cv-00794-E Legacy Exploration, LLC v. Optimum Energy Partners LLC et al\n8 3:22-cv-01333-E United States of America et al v. Heal 360 Urgent Care PLLC et al\n9 3:22-cv-01710-E United States of America et al v. Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc et al\n10 3:22-cv-02349-E Cruz et al v. Resolute Capital Partners LTD LLC et al\n11 3:22-cv-02565-E Washington v. Edwards Lifesciences LLC\n12 3:22-cv-02579-E Stark v. Edwards Lifesciences, LLC\n13 3:23-cv-00727-E FS2 Industries Incorporated et al v. Franklin, Jr. et al\n14 3:23-cv-01113-E United States of America et al v. Mr Cooper Group Inc\n15 3:23-cv-01426-E Valdez v. Tractor Supply Co of Texas LP\n16 3:23-cv-01536-E Ivan Nunez, as Representative of the Estate of Gabino Nunez v. Prime\n Insurance Company\n17 3:23-cv-01579-E Curcio v. CCS Medical Inc et al\n18 3:23-cv-01737-E Ruian City Han Sen Technology Co Ltd v. RB Distribution Inc\n19 3:23-cv-01805-E McConnell v. Applied Digital Corporation et al\n20 3:23-cv-01887-E Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Larrick et al\n21 3:23-cv-02069-E Williams v. ServiceNow Inc\n22 3:23-cv-02388-E Fluidmaster Inc v. Danco Inc\n23 3:23-cv-02482-E CR England Inc v. THK Logistics LLC\n24 3:23-cv-02532-E-BW Randle v. Brown et al\n25 3:23-cv-02791-E-BN Thompson v. UKG Inc\n26 3:23-cv-02834-E Canada, Jr. et al v. Sherman\n27 3:24-cv-00072-E Katz v. Gruenberg et al\n28 3:24-cv-00104-E Tupac v. Asbury Automotive Group Inc et al\n29 3:24-cv-00112-E-BW Keys v. Connors et al\n30 3:24-cv-00138-E SEALED\n31 3:24-cv-00586-E Car Auto Holdings LLC v. Dallas-H Inc et al\n32 3:24-cv-01182-E Crest Foods Inc v. Ohanyan LLC et al\n33 3:24-cv-01342-E Anderson v. Stevens Transport Inc et al\n34 3:24-cv-01485-E Rodriguez v. Allstate Fire and Casualty Insurance Company\n35 3:24-cv-01852-E Marten Group Inc et al v. Tennant et al\n36 3:24-cv-01904-E Jefferson et al v. Waxahachie ISD Board of Trustee et al\n37 3:24-cv-01912-E Hunter Mountain Investment Trust v. Highland Capital Management LP et\n al\n38 3:24-cv-01939-E-BT Shaik v. Launch Wise LLC et al\n39 3:24-cv-01982-E ZNG Inc v. Covington Specialty Insurance Company\n40 3:24-cv-02111-E G&G Closed Circuit Events LLC v. J Whiskey's LLC et al\n41 3:24-cv-02180-E Iske v. Precision Dynamics International LLC\n42 3:24-cv-02253-E-BW Traeger v. Farha et al\n43 3:24-cv-02266-E Skowron v. Tom Thumb Stores Inc\n44 3:24-cv-02612-E Thomasson et al v. Trans Union LLC et al\n45 3:24-cv-02642-E-BN Thompson v. Fedex Ground\n46 3:24-cv-02653-E Hunter v. Hunter\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 11 of 12 PageID 123\n Exhibit B\n\n47 3:24-cv-02811-E McDonald v. Unilever North America Supply Chain Company LLC et al\n\n48 3:25-cv-00672 -E Copeland v. G6 Hospitality\n49 3:25-cv-00099 -E Villalta v. State Farm Lloyds\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02721-M Document 25 Filed 10/05/26 Page 12 of 12 PageID 124\n Exhibit B\n\n\n CRIMINAL CASES TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE DOCKET OF CHIEF\n JUDGE REED O'CONNOR\n1 3:22-cr-00334-E USA v. Del Bosque-Reyes\n2 3:23-cr-00444-E(01) USA v. Cisneros-Ruiz\n3 3:24-cr-00078-E USA v. Clark\n4 3:24-cr-00130-E(01) USA v.Trinidad Rodriguez\n5 3:24-cr-00201-E(05) USA v. Willis\n6 3:24-cr-00287-E(03) USA v. Jimenez\n7 3:24-cr-00302-E(03) USA v. Flores Magana\n8 3:24-cr-00304-E USA v. Martinez- Fuller\n9 3:24-cr-00343-E USA v. Vargas\n10 3:24-cr-00475-E USA v. Pearl\n11 3:24-cr-00546-E(01) USA v. Noble\n12 3:25-cr-00111-E USA v. Buggs\n13 3:25-cr-00306-E USA v. Vargas\n14 3:25-cr-00366-E(02) USA v. Morgan\n15 3:25-cr-00414-E(02) USA v. Soto-Hernandez\n16 3:25-cr-00418-E USA v. Perkins\n17 3:25-cr-00518-E USA v. Creeks\n18 3:25-cr-00545-E USA v. De La Cruz et al\n19 3:26-cr-00048-E USA v. Cuadros\n20 3:26-cr-00270-E USA v. McKinney\n21 3:26-cr-00360-E USA v. Walker\n22 3:26-cr-00369-E USA v. Idarza-Medina\n23 3:26-cr-00418-E USA v. Camarillo-Garcia\n24 3:26-cr-00452-E USA v. Castro-Ochoa\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-10-06T14:24:55.484988-07:00","document_number":"19","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177019041413","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order Reassigning Case","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-10-06T14:13:12.541896-07:00","date_modified":"2026-10-06T14:13:12.548090-07:00","date_filed":"2026-10-06","time_filed":"16:05:00","entry_number":19,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-10-06.001","pacer_sequence_number":51,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/469890856/","id":469890856,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/485244922/","id":485244922,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2026-07-06T16:18:58.845030-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-06T16:18:58.851605-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order Vacating","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-06T16:18:58.829297-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-06T16:18:58.829313-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-06","time_filed":"17:21:40","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-06.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/463108031/","id":463108031,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/478244183/","id":478244183,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/16/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.720674-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T08:07:44.982270-07:00","sha1":"60f3431ec615a21ed54064ebc01d994ea3ae177e","page_count":1,"file_size":341008,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.16.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.16.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 16 Filed 05/05/26 Page 1 of 1 PageID 229\n\n\n\n IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\n RESTUARANTS INC \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff, \u00a7\n \u00a7\n v. \u00a7 Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n \u00a7\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\n RESTAURANT OF CNY LLC \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Defendant. \u00a7\n\n\n ORDER\n\n Before the Court is Plaintiff\u2019s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 2) and\n\nMotion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 13). The Court hereby REFERS these Motions and all\n\nrelated responses, replies, briefs in support, and appendices, etc., to United States Magistrate Judge\n\nHoran for hearing, if necessary, and final determination. See 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 636(b)(1). Further\n\npleadings concerning this motion shall be filed with a transmittal letter addressed to Magistrate\n\nJudge Horan so that copies may be sent directly to him without delay.\n\n SO ORDERED on this 5th day of May, 2026.\n\n\n\n\n -1-\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:22:33.675588-07:00","document_number":"16","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018585452","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order Referring Motion","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.687977-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:21:07.052012-07:00","date_filed":"2026-05-06","time_filed":"08:27:38","entry_number":16,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-05-06.001","pacer_sequence_number":38,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/463108030/","id":463108030,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/478244182/","id":478244182,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/15/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.645836-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T03:43:55.766235-07:00","sha1":"199f8628019426e76f12794794135e2b6c7023a9","page_count":77,"file_size":8630039,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.15.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.15.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 1 of 77 PageID 152\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff, \u00a7\n \u00a7\nv. \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC, \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Defendant. \u00a7\n\n APPENDIX IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT\nJUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST DEFENDANT SPAGHETTI\n WAREHOUSE RESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT\n\n\n1. Complaint for Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief,\n Damages and Other Relief Appx. 1 \u2013 16.\n2. Unsworn Declaration in Support of Motion for Temporary\n3. Restraining Order Appx. 17 \u2013 19.\n4. Exhibit A \u2013 License Agreement Appx. 20 \u2013 26.\n5. Exhibit B \u2013 October 7, 2024, Notice of Default\n Letter to Defendant Appx. 27.\n6. Exhibit C \u2013 June 23, 2025, Notice of Termination of\n License Agreement Appx. 28 \u2013 33.\n7. Declaration of Doug Pak in Support of Plaintiff\u2019s\n Motion for Default Judgment Appx. 43 \u2013 48.\n8. Press Releases - NY Restaurant Closing and\n Click Streams Opening Appx. 49 \u2013 60.\n9. Declaration of Casey S. Erick Appx. 61 \u2013 80.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT\nJUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST DEFENDANT SPAGHETTI\nWAREHOUSE RESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 1\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 2 of 77 PageID 153\n\n\n\nDATED March 13, 2026.\n\n LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP\n\n\n By:_____________________________\n CASEY S. ERICK\n TX State Bar No. 24028564\n Kyndall E. Richardson\n TX State Bar No. 24149343\n 2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2000\n Dallas, Texas 75201\n Telephone: (214) 722-7107\n Fax: (214) 722-7111\n Casey.Erick@lewisbrisbois.com\n Kyndall.Richardson@lewisbrisbois.com\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n The undersigned does hereby certify that on the 13th day of March 2026, the foregoing\ndocument was served electronically with a copy of the pleading through use of the Court's\nCM/ECF system and/or mailing it to the last known address of counsel and or parties, if any.\n\n\n _____________________________\n CASEY S. ERICK\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT\nJUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST DEFENDANT SPAGHETTI\nWAREHOUSE RESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 2\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page31of\n of77\n 16 PageID\n PageID154\n 1\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff \u00a7\n \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727 v\n v. \u00a7\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE\n \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC,\n \u00a7\n Defendant \u00a7\n \u00a7\n \u00a7\n\n COMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE\n RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER RELIEF\n\n Plaintiff, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc. (\u201cSpaghetti Warehouse\u201d or \u201cPlaintiff\u201d)\n\nbrings this Complaint for Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief, Damages, and Other\n\nRelief (\u201cComplaint\u201d) against Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC (\u201cDefendant\u201d), states\n\nas follows:\n\n NATURE OF ACTION\n\n 1. This is an action for trademark infringement under the United States and Texas\n\ntrademark laws, for unfair competition, business dilution, and breach of contract. Plaintiff seeks,\n\namong other things, a preliminary and permanent injunction (i) enjoining Defendant and those\n\nacting in concert with them from wrongful and unlawful use of Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s federally\n\nregistered trademarks, and (ii) enforcing Defendant\u2019s post-termination obligations set forth in the\n\nLicense Agreement entered into by and between Defendant and Spaghetti Warehouse. Plaintiff\n\nfurther seeks its damages, including amounts owed for past due licensing fees, future lost royalties,\n\nas well as attorneys\u2019 fees and costs of court.\n\n\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 1\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000001\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page42of\n of77\n 16 PageID\n PageID155\n 2\n\n PARTIES\n\n 2. Plaintiff, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc., is a corporation organized and\n\nexisting under the laws of the State of Texas with its principal place of business located in Dallas,\n\nTexas, and its principal office located at 1815 N. Market St., Dallas, Texas 75202.\n\n 3. Defendant, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC, is a company\n\norganized and existing under the laws of the State of New York with its principal place of business\n\nlocated in Rye, New York. Defendant can be served by serving its registered agent for service of\n\nprocess, Kathleen Northrop, Registered agent, at 411 Theodore Fremd Avenue, Suite 206, Rye,\n\nNew York, 10580\n\n JURISDICTION AND VENUE\n\n 4. The action asserts a claim for a violation of federally-registered trademarks,\n\nincluding a claim under 15 USC \u00a7\u00a7 1116, 1117, and this court has jurisdiction of this claim under\n\n15 USC \u00a7 1121(a), 28 USC \u00a7 1338(a), and jurisdiction over all related unfair competition claims\n\nunder 28 USC \u00a7 1338(b).\n\n 5. All other claims asserted in this action arise out of the same transaction or\n\noccurrence so that this court has supplemental jurisdiction over all additional claims asserted in\n\nthis action under 28 USC \u00a7 1367(a).\n\n 6. This Court also has original subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28\n\nUSC \u00a7 1331, in that this is a civil action arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the\n\nUnited States. The Court also has jurisdiction under 28 USC \u00a7 1332(a)(1), in that this is a civil\n\naction where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest\n\nand costs, and is between citizens of different States.\n\n\n\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 2\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000002\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page53of\n of77\n 16 PageID\n PageID156\n 3\n\n 7. Personal jurisdiction and venue are proper in this Court under 28 USC \u00a71391. A\n\nsubstantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to the claims asserted herein occurred in\n\nthis district, and the Defendant have sufficient contact with this district.\n\n FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1\n\n 8. Spaghetti Warehouse is a well-known Italian restaurant chain geared towards\n\nfamilies with five locations in two U.S. states: four in Ohio and one in New York. The chain\n\nstarted in 1972 in Dallas, Texas, and at one point had spread throughout the southern and eastern\n\nparts of the United States. Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s unique characteristic is that many of its older\n\nlocations are situated in renovated, historic buildings.\n\n 9. Spaghetti Warehouse has developed a brand using the name \u201cSpaghetti\n\nWarehouse\u201d (the \u201cBrand\u201d), including the registered trademarks (the \u201cMarks\u201d), a restaurant/food\n\nservice concept and system, proprietary materials and methods, know-how, trade secrets, recipes,\n\nmenus, trade dress, logos, domain names (including www.meatballs.com), and other intellectual\n\nproperty (the \u201cIntellectual Property\u201d).\n\n 10. The Marks, Brand, and Intellectual Property (collectively the \u201cLicensed Property\u201d)\n\ndistinguish Spaghetti Warehouse restaurants and products from those established, made, offered,\n\nand sold by others.\n\n 11. The Marks are registered on the Principal Register of the United States Patent and\n\nTrademark Office. The Marks\u2019 registrations continue in full force and effect, and all those eligible\n\nare incontestable under Section 15 of the Lanham Act, 15 USC \u00a7 1065.\n\n\n\n\n1\n Plaintiff incorporates the Unsworn Declaration of Mr. Doug Pak, CEO of Spaghetti Warehouse\nRestaurants, Inc., herein in its entirety.\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 3\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000003\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page64of\n of77\n 16 PageID\n PageID157\n 4\n\n 12. Spaghetti Warehouse has given notice to the public of the registration of the Marks\n\nas provided in 15 USC \u00a71111. It complies with all legal requirements to ensure Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse and its authorized licenses remain the Marks\u2019 exclusive users and licensors.\n\n 13. Spaghetti Warehouse and its licensees have continuously used the Marks in\n\ninterstate commerce in connection with (i) the promotion, sale, and franchising of Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse Restaurants and (ii) the promotion and sale of the products and services Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse offers throughout the United States, including the State of Texas, since the date of its\n\nregistration.\n\n 14. Plaintiff has the right to use and license the Marks and derivations thereof and the\n\ndistinctive Brand and Intellectual Property with which licensees offer Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s\n\nproducts to the public under the Marks.\n\n 15. Under the License Agreement (\u201cLicense\u201d) entered into by and between Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse and authorized Licensees, Spaghetti Warehouse grants Licensees a non-exclusive\n\nright and license to use the Marks in connection with the operation of a restaurant in a manner and\n\nat such locations as are expressly authorized by the license.\n\n 16. Spaghetti Warehouse uses the Marks as the marks and trade identity by which the\n\nproducts and services offered by Spaghetti Warehouse are distinguished from other restaurants,\n\nand the products and services made and sold by them.\n\n 17. Spaghetti Warehouse has extensively advertised and promoted Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse restaurants and the products and services under the Marks throughout the United\n\nStates and through various media. As a result of such efforts and the considerable money spent in\n\nconnection therewith, the products offered by Spaghetti Warehouse under the Marks have met\n\nwith widespread public approval. They have established a steady demand and goodwill among\n\nconsumers throughout the United States, including the State of Texas.\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 4\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000004\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page75of\n of77\n 16 PageID\n PageID158\n 5\n\n Defendant Acquires a License to Use the Marks Subject to the License Agreement\n\n 18. Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc. and Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of\n\nCNY, LLC (CNY) are parties to a written License Agreement, dated December 11, 2018, wherein\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse licensed the use of the Marks at Defendant\u2019s restaurant. 2\n\n 19. The Defendant is owned and operated by New York Attorney, Anthony J. Schlur,\n\nEsq., of the law firm, Goldberg Weprin Finkel Goldstein, LLP, located at 1501 Broadway,\n\n22nd Floor, New York, New York 10036, and by Connecticut Attorney, Patrick J. Dussol, Esq.,\n\nAssistant General Counsel - Real Estate at Hut 8 Corp., located at 1101 Brickell Ave, N-1500,\n\nMiami, FL 33131.\n\n 20. In executing the License Agreement, Defendant expressly acknowledged that\n\n\u201csubject to the terms and conditions outlined in this Agreement, Licensor [Spaghetti Warehouse]\n\ngrants to Licensee the non-exclusive right and license to use the Intellectual Property in connection\n\nwith the operation of the Restaurant at the Location. 3\n\n 21. The License provided, in pertinent part, that the Defendant is required to pay a\n\nLicense Fee equal to 1% of the Licensee revenues at the Restaurant for each month (the \u201cLicense\n\nFee\u201d) sixty (60) days following the end of the calendar year, and $5,000.00 for each Renewal\n\nTerm due on the first day of the Renewal Term. 4\n\n 22. The License gives Spaghetti Warehouse the right to terminate the License in the\n\n\u201cEvent of Default.\u201d One of the Events of Default is failing to pay the obligations after being given\n\n\n\n\n 2\n See Exhibit A \u2013 License Agreement.\n 3\n See Exhibit A, Section 1.1 of the License, titled \u201cGrant.\u201d\n 4\n See Exhibit A, Section 1.5 of the License, titled \u201cFee.\u201d\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 5\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000005\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page86of\n of77\n 16 PageID\n PageID159\n 6\n\nwritten notice with a failure to cure within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notice. 5 The right to\n\nterminate is cumulative to any other right Spaghetti Warehouse may have at law or in equity. 6\n\n 23. Defendant acknowledged that the Licensed Property, all materials, methods, and\n\nsystems relating to it, are proprietary and Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s sole property. Defendant agreed\n\nthat they have no rights in or to such materials, that they will not acquire any rights in such\n\nmaterials as a result of the License, and that they may not use such materials without the consent\n\nof Spaghetti Warehouse. 7\n\n 24. Defendant also agreed that they would not, either during the term of the License\n\nor after, (a) disclose, reveal, divulge, furnish, disseminate or deliver (\u201cDisclose\u201d) any Licensed\n\nProperty designated as confidential, (b) use, utilize, employ, publish, rewrite, reproduce (\u201cUse\u201d)\n\nany Licensed Property, or (c) authorize or permit any third person or entity to Disclose or Use any\n\nConfidential Information.8\n\n 25. Along with its monetary obligations, Defendant agreed to maintain and operate its\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse location in strict compliance with the License, including its agreement to\n\nnot use or permit the Licensed Property to be used: (a) in any manner that would tend to injury,\n\ndemean or dilute the reputation or value of Spaghetti Warehouse, the Marks or the goodwill\n\nsymbolized by the Intellectual Property. Furthermore, the Defendant may use the Marks only in\n\na manner authorized and permitted by Spaghetti Warehouse.9\n\n\n\n\n 5\n See Exhibit A, Section 5.3.1 to 5.3.5 of the License, titled \u201cTermination.\u201d\n 6\n See Exhibit A, Section 5.4 of the License, titled \u201cRemedies Cumulative.\u201d\n 7\n See Exhibit A, Section 6.1 of the License, titled \u201cAcknowledgement of Rights.\u201d\n 8\n See Exhibit A, Section 6.3 of the License, titled \u201cConfidentiality.\u201d\n 9\n See Exhibit A, Sections 1.2 to 1.2.3 of the License, titled \u201cUse of Licensed Property.\u201d\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 6\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000006\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page97of\n of77\n 16 PageID\n PageID160\n 7\n\n 26. Upon the occurrence of any Event of Default, Spaghetti Warehouse may, at its\n\noption, terminate the License, and all of the Defendant\u2019s rights under the License shall terminate\n\nimmediately upon the date that Spaghetti Warehouse gives written notice of termination. 10\n\n 27. Upon termination of the License, Defendant has no rights to the name or marks\n\nrelated to \u201cSpaghetti Warehouse\u201d or www.meatballs.com, unless otherwise agreed by Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse.11\n\n 28. In the event of any litigation regarding the License, the parties agreed that the\n\nprevailing party should recover all reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys\u2019 fees.12 And\n\nthat any damages arising from the breach of the License may be extensive and cause immediate\n\nand irreparable harm to Spaghetti Warehouse, and that injunctive relief may be appropriate. 13\n\n 29. Defendant fell behind and failed to make any License Fee payments and payments\n\ndue in connection with the License Agreement.\n\n 30. Spaghetti Warehouse contacted Defendant requesting payments owed under the\n\nLicense and the Notes on numerous occasions. The demands were more or less ignored.\n\n 31. It must be noted that Defendant is owned and operated by New York attorneys,\n\nand their continued use of the Trademark, after notice, is not by accident. Their violations of\n\ntrademark law and the License Agreement are done knowingly, intentionally, and with a clear\n\nunderstanding of the harm caused to Plaintiff.\n\n 32. Spaghetti Warehouse sent a formal Notice of Default dated October 7, 2024,\n\nproviding notice to Defendant that they were in default for the failure to pay said fees. 14\n\n\n\n\n 10\n See Exhibit A, Section 5.3 of the License, titled \u201cTermination.\u201d\n 11\n See Exhibit A, Section 5.5 of the License, titled \u201cUse after Termination/Expiration.\u201d\n 12\n See Exhibit A, Section 7.4 of the License, titled \u201cAttorneys\u2019 Fees.\u201d\n 13\n See Exhibit A, Section 7.5 of the License, titled \u201cInjunctive Relief.\u201d\n 14\n See Exhibit B, October 7, 2024, Notice of default letter to Defendant.\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 7\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000007\n\fCase\n Case\n 3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document\n 151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page10\n 8 of 77\n 16 PageID 161\n 8\n\n 33. Spaghetti Warehouse sent a formal Notice of Termination of License Agreement\n\ndated June 23, 2025. 15\n\n 34. Defendant failed to cure the default. Defendant has not made any payments or\n\nattempted to pay any of the amounts owed as of this filing.\n\n 35. In accordance with the termination of the License, Defendant was to stop using all\n\nMarks or other Licensed Property immediately. This includes removing all signs, advertisements,\n\nand promotional materials\n\n 36. Because the License has been terminated, Defendant lost all rights to the Licensed\n\nProperty and Marks related to \u201cSpaghetti Warehouse,\u201d including but not limited to, the\n\nwww.meatballs.com website.\n\n 37. Defendant has breached the License Agreement by failing to provide financial\n\nstatements for 2023, 2024, and 2025. Plaintiff estimates that past license fees accrued prior to\n\ntermination to be not less than $25,000.00 to $30,000.00.\n\n 38. Defendant's breach of the License gives rise to Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s claims and\n\ndamages herein.\n\n 39. Notwithstanding the termination of the License, Defendant and its agents continue\n\nto use the Licensed Property in the operation of its restaurants and continue to market and promote\n\nits restaurants using the Licensed Property.\n\n 40. Defendant\u2019s use of the Licensed Property and sale of purported Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse products is without the license or consent of Spaghetti Warehouse, and has caused or\n\nis likely to cause mistake, confusion, or deception in the minds of the public as to source,\n\naffiliation, and sponsorship.\n\n\n\n\n 15\n See Exhibit C, June 23, 2025, Notice of Termination of License Agreement.\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 8\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000008\n\fCase\n Case\n 3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document\n 151 Filed\n Filed03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page11\n 9 of 77\n 16 PageID 162\n 9\n\n 41. In addition to the fact that Defendant offers similar products to products offered by\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse and continues to use Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s name at its restaurant, the\n\nproducts provided by Defendant using the Licensed Property are offered to the same class of\n\nconsumers as those who patronize authorized Spaghetti Warehouse restaurants.\n\n 42. Upon seeing the familiar trademarks and other Licensed Property through\n\nDefendant\u2019s unauthorized use thereof, consumers will be deceived into concluding that\n\nDefendant\u2019s restaurants, and the products and services offered and sold in connection therewith,\n\nare subject to Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s supervision, are sponsored or endorsed by Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse, and bear the marks pursuant to Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s authority and permission.\n\n 43. So long as Defendant and its agents continue to use the Licensed Property in\n\nconnection with its restaurant\u2019s operation, consumers have no practical way of knowing that\n\nDefendant\u2019s former Spaghetti Warehouse is no longer affiliated with, sponsored, authorized, or\n\nendorsed by Spaghetti Warehouse. As a result, any consumer dissatisfaction with Defendant\u2019s\n\nrestaurant, or with the products and services offered in connection therewith, will be attributed to\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse and the entire Spaghetti Warehouse network.\n\n 44. Defendant has received actual notice of its violation and infringement of the\n\nLicensed Property and has constructive notice of Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s rights in the trademarks\n\nand the registrations thereof pursuant to 15 USC \u00a7 1072.\n\n 45. Defendant\u2019s continued infringement is willful, malicious, fraudulent, and\n\ndeliberate.\n\n 46. Spaghetti Warehouse has at all times complied with and fully performed all of its\n\nobligations under the License Agreement.\n\n\n\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 9\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000009\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document15\n 1 Filed 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page 12\n 10 of 77\n 16 PageID 163\n 10\n\n COUNT I\n\n LANHAM ACT - TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT\n\n 47. Plaintiff repeats and realleges \u00b6\u00b6 1 through 44 of its Complaint as if fully set forth\n\nherein.\n\n 48. Defendant\u2019s acts, practices, and conduct constitute an infringing use in interstate\n\ncommerce of a reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of the Marks, and\n\nDefendant\u2019s sale, offering for sale, distribution or advertising of goods and services under the\n\nMarks, or any designs similar thereto, is likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive the\n\npublic in violation of 15 USC \u00a7 1114(l).\n\n 49. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant\u2019s infringement, Plaintiff has been\n\nand is likely to be substantially injured in its business, including its goodwill and reputation,\n\nresulting in lost revenues and profits and diminished goodwill.\n\n 50. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law because the Marks are unique and\n\nrepresent to the public Plaintiff\u2019s identity, reputation, and goodwill, such that damages alone\n\ncannot fully compensate for Defendant\u2019s misconduct.\n\n 51. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendant and those acting in concert with them\n\nwill continue to use and infringe the Marks, to Plaintiff\u2019s irreparable injury.\n\n 52. This threat of future injury to Plaintiff\u2019s business identity, goodwill, and reputation\n\nrequires injunctive relief to prevent Defendant\u2019s continued use of the Marks, and to ameliorate\n\nand mitigate Plaintiff\u2019s injuries.\n\n COUNT II\n\n LANHAM ACT - UNFAIR COMPETITION\n\n 53. Plaintiff repeats and realleges \u00b6\u00b6 1 through 50 of its Complaint as if fully set forth\n\nherein.\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 10\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000010\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document15\n 1 Filed 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page 13\n 11 of 77\n 16 PageID 164\n 11\n\n 54. Defendant\u2019s acts, practices, and conduct constitute unfair competition, false\n\ndesignation of origin, and false or misleading descriptions or representations of fact, in that they\n\nare likely to cause confusion or to cause mistake, to deceive others as to the affiliation, connection,\n\nor association of the parties, and/or to misrepresent the nature, characteristics, qualities, or\n\ngeographic origin of the parties\u2019 goods, services and commercial activities, all in violation of 15\n\nUSC \u00a7 1125(a).\n\n 55. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant\u2019s unfair competition, Plaintiff has\n\nbeen and is likely to be substantially injured in its business, including its goodwill and reputation,\n\nresulting in lost revenues and profits and diminished goodwill.\n\n 56. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law because the Marks are unique and\n\nrepresent to the public Plaintiff\u2019s identity, reputation, and goodwill, such that damages alone\n\ncannot fully compensate Plaintiff for Defendant\u2019s misconduct.\n\n\n\n 57. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendant and those acting in concert with them\n\nwill continue to compete unfairly with Plaintiff, to Plaintiff\u2019s irreparable injury. This threat of\n\nfuture injury to Plaintiff\u2019s business identity, goodwill, and reputation requires injunctive relief to\n\nprevent Defendant\u2019s continued unfair competition and to ameliorate and mitigate Plaintiff\u2019s\n\ninjuries.\n\n COUNT III\n\n BREACH OF CONTRACT\n\n 58. Plaintiff repeats and realleges \u00b6\u00b6 1 through 55 of its Complaint as if fully set forth\n\nherein.\n\n 59. Defendant has failed and refused to perform its obligations under the License\n\nAgreement, including its obligations (i) to pay all amounts owed to Spaghetti Warehouse, (ii) to\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 11\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000011\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document15\n 1 Filed 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page 14\n 12 of 77\n 16 PageID 165\n 12\n\ncease using the Licensed Property (iii) to surrender to Spaghetti Warehouse all materials bearing\n\nany of the Marks, and (iv) to discontinue all use of Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s confidential and\n\nproprietary information.\n\n 60. Unless and until Defendant is ordered to perform its post-termination obligations\n\nunder the License Agreement, Plaintiff is likely to be substantially injured in its business,\n\nincluding its goodwill and reputation, resulting in lost revenues and profits and diminished\n\ngoodwill, for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.\n\n 61. This threat of future injury to Plaintiff\u2019s business identity, goodwill, and reputation\n\nrequires that Defendant be ordered to perform its contractual post-termination obligations under\n\nthe License Agreement to prevent Defendant\u2019s continued breach and to ameliorate and mitigate\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s injuries.\n\n 62. In addition to the injuries inflicted to Plaintiff\u2019s business identity, goodwill, and\n\nreputation, Plaintiff continues to be damaged in an amount equal to all outstanding monies owed\n\nunder the License.\n\n 63. Also, the License Agreement provides that in the event of any default on the part\n\nof either party, the party in default will pay the prevailing party, among other things, all reasonable\n\nattorneys\u2019 fees incurred by the prevailing party in any legal action or other proceeding as a result\n\nof such default.\n\n 64. Spaghetti Warehouse at all times fully performed all of its obligations under the\n\nLicense Agreement. Defendant breached and failed to perform in accordance with the License and\n\nother agreements, and said breach has caused Plaintiff to incur damages, including but not limited\n\nto attorneys\u2019 fees.\n\n COUNT IV\n\n COMMON-LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT,\n COMMON-LAW AND STATUTORY UNFAIR COMPETITION\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 12\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000012\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document15\n 1 Filed 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page 15\n 13 of 77\n 16 PageID 166\n 13\n\n 65. Plaintiff repeats and realleges \u00b6\u00b6 1 through 62 of its Complaint as if fully set forth\n\nherein.\n\n 66. As a result of the public\u2019s association of the Spaghetti Warehouse marks with\n\nPlaintiff, Defendant\u2019s use and sale of deceptively similar products in connection with its restaurant\n\nis likely to cause confusion, mistake, and to deceive.\n\n 67. Defendant has continued using Plaintiffs\u2019 Marks with full prior knowledge of\n\nPlaintiffs\u2019 rights to them and of the reputation of the Spaghetti Warehouse trademarks.\n\n 68. Defendant\u2019s sale and use of the Marks were for the willful and calculated purpose\n\nof trading on Plaintiffs\u2019 goodwill; further, Defendant have willfully promoted the restaurants in\n\nsuch a manner so as inevitably to suggest an association, affiliation, or sponsorship with, or\n\napproval by, Plaintiff and to cause, or be likely to cause, confusion, or mistake among purchasers\n\nas to the origin of Defendant\u2019s products, all to Defendant\u2019s gain and Plaintiff\u2019s damage.\n\n 69. The conduct of Defendant violates and constitutes an infringement of Plaintiff\u2019s\n\ncommon-law rights in the Marks and constitutes improper and unfair competition with Plaintiff\n\nunder the laws of the State of Texas.\n\n 70. Defendant\u2019s conduct has damaged and will continue to damage Plaintiff\u2019s\n\ngoodwill and reputation and will further cause irreparable injury unless restrained by this Court.\n\n 71. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.\n\n COUNT V\n\n TRADEMARK DILUTION AND INJURY TO BUSINESS REPUTATION\n\n 72. Plaintiff repeats and realleges \u00b6\u00b6 1 through 69 of its Complaint as if fully set forth\n\nherein.\n\n 73. Defendant\u2019s conduct will cause a likelihood of dilution of the distinctive and\n\nvaluable quality of Plaintiff\u2019s trademarks and a likelihood of injury to Plaintiff\u2019s business\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 13\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000013\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document15\n 1 Filed 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page 16\n 14 of 77\n 16 PageID 167\n 14\n\nreputation in violation of the laws of the State of Texas, particularly Section 16.103 of the Texas\n\nBusiness and Commerce Code, unless enjoined by this Court.\n\n 74. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.\n\n PRAYER FOR RELIEF\n\n 75. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for the following relief against\n\nDefendant:\n\n a. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoying Defendant, its agents, servants,\n and employees, and those people in active concert or participation with them, from:\n\n i. Using the Marks or any trademark, service mark, logo, or trade name that is\n confusingly similar to the Marks;\n\n ii Otherwise infringing on the Marks or using any similar designation, alone or in\n combination with any other components;\n\n iii. Passing off any of its products or services like those of Spaghetti Warehouse or\n its authorized licensee;\n\n iv Causing a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to the source or\n sponsorship of its businesses, products, or services;\n\n v Causing a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to its affiliation,\n connection, or association with Spaghetti Warehouse and its franchisees or any of\n Spaghetti Warehouse\u2019s products or services;\n\n vi Unfairly competing with Spaghetti Warehouse or its affiliates in any manner;\n\n b. An order pursuant to 15 USC \u00a7 1118 that all labels, signs, prints, packages,\n wrappers, receptacles, uniforms, logo items, and advertisements in possession of\n Defendant, its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, agents, servants and employees, and\n those people in active concert or participation with them bearing the Marks, and\n all plates, molds, and other means of making the same, if any, be delivered to\n Spaghetti Warehouse at Defendant\u2019s cost;\n\n c. An order that Defendant be required to promptly eliminate its advertising under\n the Marks or any other confusingly similar designations from all media, including,\n but not limited to, websites, emails, newspapers, flyers, coupons, promotions,\n signs, menus, telephone books, telephone directory assistance listings, and mass\n mailings, all at Defendant\u2019s cost;\n\n\n\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 14\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000014\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document15\n 1 Filed 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page 17\n 15 of 77\n 16 PageID 168\n 15\n\n d. An order that Defendant be required to file with the Court and to serve upon\n Plaintiff\u2019s counsel within ten (10) days after entry of any injunction or order issued\n herein, a written report, under oath, setting forth in detail the manner in which they\n have complied with such injunction or order;\n\n e. An order that Defendant account and pay over to Plaintiff all gains, profits, and\n advantages derived by them as a result of its infringement of the Marks, breach of\n contract, and unfair competition to the full extent provided for by Section 35 of the\n Lanham Act, 15 USC \u00a7 1117, and by the controlling principles of common law;\n\n f. An order that Defendant pay to Plaintiffs such damages as Plaintiffs have sustained\n by reason of said trademark infringement, breach of contract, business dilution,\n and unfair competition; and that, because of the willful nature of the said\n infringement, the Court enter judgment for Plaintiff for three times the amount of\n said damages, pursuant to Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 USC \u00a7 1117;\n\n g. An award of damages equal to the past-due amounts owed, the net present value\n of the License Fees that would have become due had Defendant not defaulted\n under the License Agreement, and such other damages proven at trial of this\n matter;\n\n h. An Order requiring Defendant to immediately perform its contractual post-\n termination obligations under the License Agreement, including, without\n limitation, its obligations:\n\n i. An Order to take any and all necessary steps to cancel and/or transfer to Spaghetti\n Warehouse any telephone numbers associated with Spaghetti Warehouse or the\n Marks used in connection with the operation of Defendant\u2019s former Spaghetti\n Warehouse restaurants; and\n\n j. An Order to return to Spaghetti Warehouse all operating manuals and other\n materials provided to Defendant in connection with the operation of its former\n Spaghetti Warehouse restaurants, and all materials bear any of the Marks;\n\n k. An award of the costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney\u2019s fees, incurred\n by Plaintiff in connection with this action as provided for by statute and the parties\u2019\n License Agreement; and\n\n l. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\n\n\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 15\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000015\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document15\n 1 Filed 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page 18\n 16 of 77\n 16 PageID 169\n\n Respectfully submitted,\n\n COWLES & THOMPSON, PC\n\n\n\n By:\n Casey S. Erick\n Texas Bar No. 24028564\n Email: cerick@cowlesthompson.com\n William l. Siegel\n Texas Bar No. 18342480\n Email: bsiegel@cowlesthompson.com\n\n 901 Main Street\n Suite 3900\n Dallas, Texas 75202\n Tel. (214) 672-2138\n Fax. (214) 672-2338\n\n ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF,\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE\n RESTAURANTS, INC.\n\n\n\n\nCOMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER\nRELIEF \u2013 PAGE 16\n1659701.1\n\n APPENDIX 000016\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-1 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 191ofof77\n 3 PageID\n PageID 17\n 170\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000017\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-1 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 202ofof77\n 3 PageID\n PageID 18\n 171\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000018\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-1 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 213ofof77\n 3 PageID\n PageID 19\n 172\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000019\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-2 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 221ofof77\n 7 PageID\n PageID 20\n 173\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000020\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-2 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 232ofof77\n 7 PageID\n PageID 21\n 174\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000021\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-2 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 243ofof77\n 7 PageID\n PageID 22\n 175\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000022\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-2 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 254ofof77\n 7 PageID\n PageID 23\n 176\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000023\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-2 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 265ofof77\n 7 PageID\n PageID 24\n 177\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000024\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-2 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 276ofof77\n 7 PageID\n PageID 25\n 178\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000025\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-2 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 287ofof77\n 7 PageID\n PageID 26\n 179\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000026\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-3 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 291ofof77\n 1 PageID\n PageID 27\n 180\n CAROLYN H. FOLLIS LEGAL CONSULTANCY SERVICES\n\n VIA EMAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\n\n October 7. 2024\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurant Of CNY, LLC\n411 Theodore Fremd Avenue\nSuite 206\nRye, New York 10580\nAttn: Kathleen Northrop\n\nRE: Demand/Notice of Breach of that certain License dated December 11,2018, by and between Spaghetti Warehouse\nRestaurants, Inc.(\u201cSWRI\u201d) and Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY (\u201cSWCNY \u201cor \u201cLicensee\u201d).\n\nDear Ms. Northrop:\n\nOnce again, it has come to my attention that SWCNY has failed to pay the License Fee for Fiscal year 2023.\nOctober 7th is far past 60 days from the end of the 2023 Fiscal year as required in Section 1.5. This demand letter\nserves as written notice of default in accordance with Section 7.\n\nOn more than one occasion, Hwan Pak, on behalf of SWRI, has notified Anthony Schlur of SWCNY by direct\ncommunication on its lack of providing the 2023 Revenue numbers as well as the failure to pay the License Fee. Yet as\nof this date, the 2023 Revenue numbers and the License Fee remain outstanding.\n\nFor the avoidance of any doubt, this letter is a formal notice of an Event of Default for failure to pay and a demand\nfor a full account and payment of the 2023 License Fees.\n\nDemand is hereby made that SWCNY remit the 2023 Revenue report to Hwan Pak at hwan.pak@bldbrands.com,\n\nand\n\nremit the License Fee for the 2023 Fiscal Year to Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc., 949 South Coast Dr, #450,\nCosta Mesa, CA 92626\n\nBe advised, should SWCNY fail to cure this default within 30 days of the email receipt of this letter, in accordance\nwith Section 5.3 SWRI may, at its option, and without waiving any rights or remedies under the contract or at\nlaw or in equity, seek damages, and terminate the License and all of Licensee's rights under the License\nwould terminate e\ufb00ective (i) immediately upon the date that Licensor gives written notice of termination, (ii)\nupon such other date as may be set forth in such notice of termination, or (iii) at SWRI\u2019s option atomically\nupon the lapse of the speci\ufb01ed period following, an Event of Default.\n\nSWRI expressly reserves its rights and remedies available under the contract and at law.\n\nSincerely,\n\n\n\n\nCarolyn H. Follis\nLegal Consultancy Services\non behalf of Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc.\n\ncc: Grant Norrid, Hwan Pak\ncc: and direct email to Antony Schlur\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000027\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-4 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 301ofof77\n 6 PageID\n PageID 28\n 181\n\n\n\n William L. Siegel\n Tel: 214-672-2126\n Fax: 214-672-2326\n bsiegel@cowlesthompson.com\n\n\n June 23, 2025\n\nVIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUEST 7022 3330 0001 8921 3727\nAND FIRST CLASS MAIL\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n411 Theodore Fremd Avenue\nSuite 206\nRye, New York, 10580\nAttn: Kathleen Northrup\n\nVIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUEST 7022 3330 0001 8921 3734,\nFIRST CLASS MAIL AND\nEMAIL: aschlur@gwfglaw.com, anthony@syracusespaghetti.com\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n411 Theodore Fremd Avenue\nSuite 206\nRye, New York, 10580\nAttn: Anthony Schlur\n\n\nVIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUEST 7022 3330 0001 8921 3741,\nFIRST CLASS MAIL AND\nEMAIL: patrick@syracusespaghetti.com\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n411 Theodore Fremd Avenue\nSuite 206\nRye, New York, 10580\nAttn: Patrick Dussol\n\n Re: Termination of the License Agreement Between Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants,\n Inc., as Licensor (hereafter \u201cLicensor\u201d), and Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of\n CNY LLC, as Licensee, (herafter \u201cLicensee\u201d) located at 689 N. Clinton Street,\n Syarcuse, New York\n\nDear Messrs. Schlur and Dussol and Ms. Northrup:\n\nPlease be advised that the undersigned represents Licensor in reference to the above matter.\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000028\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-4 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 312ofof77\n 6 PageID\n PageID 29\n 182\nJune 23, 2025\nPage 2\n\n\nAttached is a Notice of Termination of License Agreement (\u201cNotice\u201d). As representatives of\nLicensee, among other things set forth in the Notice, you are hereby notified of such termination\nand to cease and desist from from using the Intellectual Property of Licensor as defined in the\nLicense Agreement, the Proprietary Marks, including the name or marks related to Spaghetti\nWarehouse\u201d including signage and menus or www.meatballsc.com. and the Licensed Property as\ndefined in the Licensed Agreement. Any use of, or aiding and abetting the use of Intellectual\nProperty, the Proprietary Marks, including the name or marks related to Spaghetti Warehouse or\nwww.meatballsc.com. and the Licensed Property following this termination of the License shall\ngive rise to a cause of action for the unlawful use and misappropriation of the Intellectual Property,\nProprietary Marks, including the name or marks related to Spaghetti Warehouse or\nwww.meatballsc.com. and the Licensed Property owned by Licensor giving rise to damages and\nequitable relief.\n\nIf you have any questions, please contact me.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n\n\n William L. Siegel\n\ncc: Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc.\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000029\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-4 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 323ofof77\n 6 PageID\n PageID 30\n 183\n\n NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF LICENSE AGREEMENT\nVIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUEST, FIRST CLASS MAIL AND\nEMAIL\n\nTo: Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n 411 Theodore Fremd Avenue\n Suite 206\n Rye, New York, 10580\n Attn: Kathleen Northrup\n Attn: Anthony Schlur: aschlur@gwfglaw.com, anthony@syracusespaghetti.com\n Attn: Patrick Dussol: patrick@syracusespaghetti.com\n\nRe: Termination of the License Agreement Between Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants,\nInc., as Licensor (hereafter \u201cLicensor\u201d), and Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC,\nas Licensee, (herafter \u201cLicensee\u201d) located at 689 N. Clinton Street, Syarcuse, New York;\nand\n\nBE ADVISED that by virtue of the License Agreement, Licensor granted Licensee a license\nto use Intellectual Property of Licensor as defined in the License Agreement, the Proprietory\nMarks as defined in the License Agreement, including the the name or marks related to\nSpaghetti Warehouse\u201d including signage and menues or www.meatballsc.com and the\nLicensed Property as defined in the Licensed Agreement (the \u201c Syracuse License\u201d)\n\nPursuant to Section 1.5 of the License Agreement, Licensee is required to pay a License Fee\nof 1% of Licensee Revenues (the \u201cLicense Fee\u201d) for each month to be paid to Licensor within\n60 days following the end of a calendar year.\n\nOn numerous occasions, demand has been made on Licensee to pay the License Fee including\ndemand made on October 7, 2024.\n\nBE FURTHER ADVISED, that the last time Licensee paid a Licensee Fee was on December\n5, 2023.\n\nBE FURTHER ADVISED, by virtue of Licensee\u2019s failure to timely pay the License Fee and\nits failure to cure such default notwithstanding demand made upon Licensee, that effective\nJune 23, 2025, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc. has and does hereby TERMINATE\nthe Syracuse License.\n\nBE FURTHER ADVISED that by virtue of such termination, Licensee shall have no rights\nto use and shall cease and desist from using the Intellectual Property of Licensor as defined\nin the License Agreement, the Proprietary Marks, including the name or marks related to\nSpaghetti Warehouse\u201d including signage and menus or www.meatballsc.com. and the\nLicensed Property as defined in the Licensed Agreement. Any use of, or aiding and abetting\nthe use of Intellectual Property, the Proprietary Marks, including the name or marks related\nto Spaghetti Warehouse\u201d or www.meatballsc.com. and the Licensed Property following this\ntermination of the Syracuse License shall give rise to a cause of action for the unlawful use\nand misappropriation of the Intellectual Property, Proprietary Marks, including the name\n\n\n1656316.2\n\n APPENDIX 000030\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-4 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 334ofof77\n 6 PageID\n PageID 31\n 184\n\nor marks related to Spaghetti Warehouse\u201d or www.meatballsc.com. and the Licensed\nProperty owned by Licensor giving rise to damages and equitable relief\n\nAny questions regarding legal issues should be addressed to the undersigned counsel for\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc., and any questions regarding business or operational\nmatters should be addressed to Spaghetti Warehouse, Inc., as shown below.\n\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE COWLES & THOMPSON, P.C.\n RESTAURANTS, INC\n\n\n Janiene Mielke, Controller By: ______________________________\n Email: Janiene.mielke@bldbrands.com William L. Siegel\n Office: 714-450-7641\n 901 Main Street, Suite 3900\n Hwan Pak, Project Manager Dallas, Texas 75202\n Email; Hwan.Pak@bldbrands.com Phone (214) 672-2126\n Cell: 909-967-2010 Facsimile (214) 672-2326\n Office: 714-509-5957 Email: bsiegel@cowlesthompson.com\n\n ATTORNEYS FOR SPAGHETTI\n WAREHOUSE RESTAURANTS, INC\n\n\n\n\n1656316.2\n\n APPENDIX 000031\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-4 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 345ofof77\n 6 PageID\n PageID 32\n 185\n\n NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF LICENSE AGREEMENT\nVIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUEST, FIRST CLASS MAIL AND\nEMAIL\n\nTo: Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n 411 Theodore Fremd Avenue\n Suite 206\n Rye, New York, 10580\n Attn: Kathleen Northrup\n Attn: Anthony Schlur: aschlur@gwfglaw.com, anthony@syracusespaghetti.com\n Attn: Patrick Dussol: patrick@syracusespaghetti.com\n\nRe: Termination of the License Agreement Between Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants,\nInc., as Licensor (hereafter \u201cLicensor\u201d), and Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC,\nas Licensee, (herafter \u201cLicensee\u201d) located at 689 N. Clinton Street, Syarcuse, New York;\nand\n\nBE ADVISED that by virtue of the License Agreement, Licensor granted Licensee a license\nto use Intellectual Property of Licensor as defined in the License Agreement, the Proprietory\nMarks as defined in the License Agreement, including the the name or marks related to\nSpaghetti Warehouse\u201d including signage and menues or www.meatballsc.com and the\nLicensed Property as defined in the Licensed Agreement (the \u201c Syracuse License\u201d)\n\nPursuant to Section 1.5 of the License Agreement, Licensee is required to pay a License Fee\nof 1% of Licensee Revenues (the \u201cLicense Fee\u201d) for each month to be paid to Licensor within\n60 days following the end of a calendar year.\n\nOn numerous occasions, demand has been made on Licensee to pay the License Fee including\ndemand made on October 7, 2024.\n\nBE FURTHER ADVISED, that the last time Licensee paid a Licensee Fee was on December\n5, 2023.\n\nBE FURTHER ADVISED, by virtue of Licensee\u2019s failure to timely pay the License Fee and\nits failure to cure such default notwithstanding demand made upon Licensee, that effective\nJune 23, 2025, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc. has and does hereby TERMINATE\nthe Syracuse License.\n\nBE FURTHER ADVISED that by virtue of such termination, Licensee shall have no rights\nto use and shall cease and desist from using the Intellectual Property of Licensor as defined\nin the License Agreement, the Proprietary Marks, including the name or marks related to\nSpaghetti Warehouse\u201d including signage and menus or www.meatballsc.com. and the\nLicensed Property as defined in the Licensed Agreement. Any use of, or aiding and abetting\nthe use of Intellectual Property, the Proprietary Marks, including the name or marks related\nto Spaghetti Warehouse\u201d or www.meatballsc.com. and the Licensed Property following this\ntermination of the Syracuse License shall give rise to a cause of action for the unlawful use\nand misappropriation of the Intellectual Property, Proprietary Marks, including the name\n\n\n1656316.2\n\n APPENDIX 000032\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-4 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 356ofof77\n 6 PageID\n PageID 33\n 186\n\nor marks related to Spaghetti Warehouse\u201d or www.meatballsc.com. and the Licensed\nProperty owned by Licensor giving rise to damages and equitable relief\n\nAny questions regarding legal issues should be addressed to the undersigned counsel for\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc., and any questions regarding business or operational\nmatters should be addressed to Spaghetti Warehouse, Inc., as shown below.\n\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE COWLES & THOMPSON, P.C.\n RESTAURANTS, INC\n\n\n Janiene Mielke, Controller By: ______________________________\n Email: Janiene.mielke@bldbrands.com William L. Siegel\n Office: 714-450-7641\n 901 Main Street, Suite 3900\n Hwan Pak, Project Manager Dallas, Texas 75202\n Email; Hwan.Pak@bldbrands.com Phone (214) 672-2126\n Cell: 909-967-2010 Facsimile (214) 672-2326\n Office: 714-509-5957 Email: bsiegel@cowlesthompson.com\n\n ATTORNEYS FOR SPAGHETTI\n WAREHOUSE RESTAURANTS, INC\n\n\n\n\n1656316.2\n\n APPENDIX 000033\n\fJS 44 (Rev. 04/21)\u0003 7;1'\u0003\u0017\u0012\u0015\u0014 CIVIL COVER SHEET\n Case\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-5 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 361ofof77\n 2 PageID\n PageID 34\n 187\nThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as\nprovided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the\npurpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)\nI. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE RESTAURANTS, INC. SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE RESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC\n\n (b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Dallas County of Residence of First Listed Defendant Westchester\n (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)\n NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF\n THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.\n\n (c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)\n\n Casey Erick and Bill Siegel of Cowles Thompson PC,\n 901 Main Street, Suite 3900, Dallas, Texas 75202\nII. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an \u201cX\u201d in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an \u201cX\u201d in One Box for Plaintiff\n (For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)\n 1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF\n Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State \u2716 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place \u2716 4 4\n of Business In This State\n\n 2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 \u2716 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 \u2716 5\n Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State\n\n Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6\n Foreign Country\nIV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an \u201cX\u201d in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.\n CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES\n 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act\n 120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC\n 130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))\n 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ INTELLECTUAL 400 State Reapportionment\n 150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust\n & Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking\n 151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers\u2019 Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce\n 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent - Abbreviated 460 Deportation\n Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Racketeer Influenced and\n (Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability \u2716 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations\n 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR 880 Defend Trade Secrets 480 Consumer Credit\n of Veteran\u2019s Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud 710 Fair Labor Standards Act of 2016 (15 USC 1681 or 1692)\n 160 Stockholders\u2019 Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending Act 485 Telephone Consumer\n 190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal 720 Labor/Management SOCIAL SECURITY Protection Act\n 195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations 861 HIA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV\n 196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/\n 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability 751 Family and Medical 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange\n Medical Malpractice Leave Act 864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions\n REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 790 Other Labor Litigation 865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts\n 210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: 791 Employee Retirement 893 Environmental Matters\n 220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act FEDERAL TAX SUITS 895 Freedom of Information\n 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff Act\n 240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence or Defendant) 896 Arbitration\n 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 871 IRS\u2014Third Party 899 Administrative Procedure\n 290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION 26 USC 7609 Act/Review or Appeal of\n Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application Agency Decision\n 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration 950 Constitutionality of\n Other 550 Civil Rights Actions State Statutes\n 448 Education 555 Prison Condition\n 560 Civil Detainee -\n Conditions of\n Confinement\nV. ORIGIN (Place an \u201cX\u201d in One Box Only)\n\u2716 1 Original 2 Removed from 3 Remanded from 4 Reinstated or 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict 8 Multidistrict\n Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -\n (specify) Transfer Direct File\n Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):\n 15 USC \u00a7\u00a7 1116, 1117, 15 USC \u00a7 1121(a) , 28 USC \u00a7 1338(a), 28 USC \u00a7 1338(b)\nVI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:\n This case in violation of federally-registered trademarks and unfair competition claims.\nVII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:\n COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. exceeds $75,000 JURY DEMAND: \u2716 Yes No\nVIII. RELATED CASE(S)\n (See instructions):\n IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER\nDATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD\n10/07/2025 /s/Casey Erick\nFOR OFFICE USE ONLY\n\n RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE\n APPENDIX 000034\n\fJS 44 Reverse (Rev. 04/21)\u0003\u0003 7;1'\u0003 \u0017\u0012\u0015\u0014\n Case\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-5 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 372ofof77\n 2 PageID\n PageID 35\n 188\n INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44\n Authority For Civil Cover Sheet\n\nThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as\nrequired by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is\nrequired for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of\nCourt for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:\n\nI.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use\n only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then\n the official, giving both name and title.\n (b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the\n time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land\n condemnation cases, the county of residence of the \"defendant\" is the location of the tract of land involved.)\n (c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting\n in this section \"(see attachment)\".\n\n,,\u0011 Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an \"X\"\n in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.\n United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.\n United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an \"X\" in this box.\n Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment\n to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes\n precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.\n Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the\n citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity\n cases.)\n\n,,,\u0011 Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this\n section for each principal party.\n\n,9\u0011 Nature of Suit. Place an \"X\" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code\n that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.\n\n9\u0011 Origin. Place an \"X\" in one of the seven boxes.\n Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.\n Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.\n Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing\n date.\n Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.\n Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or\n multidistrict litigation transfers.\n Multidistrict Litigation \u2013 Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.\n Section 1407.\n Multidistrict Litigation \u2013 Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.\u0003PLEASE\n NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to\u0003changes in\n statute.\n\n9,\u0011 Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional\n statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service.\n\n9,,\u0011 Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an \"X\" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.\n Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.\n Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.\n\n9,,,\u0011 Related Cases. 7KLV\u0003VHFWLRQ\u0003RI\u0003WKH\u0003-6\u0003\u0017\u0017\u0003LV\u0003XVHG\u0003WR\u0003UHIHUHQFH\u0003UHODWHG\u0003FDVHV\u000f\u0003LI\u0003DQ\\\u0011\u0003,I\u0003D\u0003UHODWHG\u0003FDVH\u0003H[LVWV\u000f\u0003ZKHWKHU\u0003SHQGLQJ\u0003RU\u0003FORVHG\u000f\u0003LQVHUW\u0003WKH\n GRFNHW\u0003QXPEHUV\u0003DQG\u0003WKH\u0003FRUUHVSRQGLQJ\u0003MXGJH\u0003QDPHV\u0003IRU\u0003VXFK\u0003FDVHV\u0011\u0003$\u0003FDVH\u0003LV\u0003UHODWHG\u0003WR\u0003WKLV\u0003ILOLQJ\u0003LI\u0003WKH\u0003FDVH\u001d\u0003\u0014 \u0003LQYROYHV\u0003VRPH\u0003RU\u0003DOO\u0003RI\u0003WKH\u0003VDPH\n SDUWLHV\u0003DQG\u0003LV\u0003EDVHG\u0003RQ\u0003WKH\u0003VDPH\u0003RU\u0003VLPLODU\u0003FODLP\u001e\u0003\u0015 \u0003LQYROYHV\u0003WKH\u0003VDPH\u0003SURSHUW\\\u000f\u0003WUDQVDFWLRQ\u000f\u0003RU\u0003HYHQW\u001e\u0003\u0016 \u0003LQYROYHV\u0003VXEVWDQWLDOO\\\u0003VLPLODU\u0003LVVXHV\u0003RI\u0003ODZ\n DQG\u0003IDFW\u001e\u0003DQG\u0012RU\u0003\u0017 \u0003LQYROYHV\u0003WKH\u0003VDPH\u0003HVWDWH\u0003LQ\u0003D\u0003EDQNUXSWF\\\u0003DSSHDO\u0011\n\n\nDate and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000035\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-6 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 381ofof77\n 2 PageID\n PageID 36\n 189\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff \u00a7\n \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727 v\n v. \u00a7\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE\n \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC,\n \u00a7\n Defendant \u00a7\n \u00a7\n \u00a7\n\n PLAINTIFF\u2019S DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND\n CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES\n\n Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc.\n\n(\u201cPlaintiff\u201d), by and through its undersigned attorneys, states as follows:\n\n1. Plaintiff Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc, is a Texas corporation with a principal\n place of business in Dallas, Texas.\n\n Other persons or other legal entities that may be financially interested in the outcome of\nthis matter are:\n\n 1. Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n Defendant\n\n 2. Defendant Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants of CNY is a New York corporation\n with a principal place of business in Rye, New York.\n\n 3. Defendant Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants of CNY owners are Anthony Schlur\n Esq and Patrick J. Dussol, Esq.\n\n 4. Defendant Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants of CNY registered agent is Kathleen\n Northrop located at411 Theodore Fremd Avenue, Suite 206, Rye New York,\n 105060.\n\n\n\n\nPLAINTIFF\u2019S DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES Page 1 of 2\n APPENDIX 000036\n\fCase\n Case3:25-cv-02727-E\n 3:25-cv-02727-E Document\n Document151-6 Filed\n Filed\n 03/13/26\n 10/07/25 Page\n Page\n 392ofof77\n 2 PageID\n PageID 37\n 190\n\n\n\n Respectfully submitted,\n\n By\n CASEY S. ERICK\n Texas Bar No. 24028564\n cerick@cowlesthompson.com\n WILLIAM L. SIEGEL\n Texas Bar No. 18342480\n bsiegel@cowlesthompson.com\n\n COWLES & THOMPSON, P.C.\n 901 Main Street, Suite 3900\n Dallas, TX 75202-3746\n (214) 672-2138\n (214) 672-2338 (Fax)\n\n ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n The undersigned certifies that on October 7th, 2025, a true and correct copy of the above\n\nand foregoing was electronically filed and served upon all counsel of record with the Clerk of the\n\nCourt using the CM/ECF system and via-email.\n\n\n\n\n CASEY S. ERICK\n\n\n\n\nPLAINTIFF\u2019S DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES Page 2 of 2\n APPENDIX 000037\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 40 of 77 PageID 191\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000043\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 41 of 77 PageID 192\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000044\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 42 of 77 PageID 193\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000045\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 43 of 77 PageID 194\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000046\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 44 of 77 PageID 195\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000047\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 45 of 77 PageID 196\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000048\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 46 of 77 PageID 197\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000049\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 47 of 77 PageID 198\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 48 of 77 PageID 199\n012345678\u00ff \u00ff \u00ff0\u000e3\u000f\u00107\u0011\u0011\u0012\u00ff\u0013327\u0010\u00145678\u00ff3\u00ff\u0015\u0014\u0016\u000f\u0011\u0012\u00177\u00ff01234567\u00ff276\u00113523\u0016\u0011\u00ff\u0018\u0016\u0014\u0019\u0016\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff\u0012\u00116\u00ff\u00112\u0014\u0015\u001571\u00ff432\u00ff\u001b\u0012\u0016\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff2\u0014\u0014\u0017\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u001c\u00113\u0015\u00123\u0016\n\u001d\u001772\u001243\u0016\u00ff4\u0014\u0017\u001a\u00142\u0011\u00ff\u001a\u0014\u0014\u001b8\u00ff\u0019\u0012\u0015\u0015\u00ff4\u0015\u001467\u00ff3\u0011\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff7\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u0014\u001a\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff1732\n\u001e\u00107\u00ff276\u00113523\u0016\u00118\u00ff\u0015\u001443\u00117\u001b\u00ff\u0012\u0016\u00ff3\u00ff\u0010\u00126\u0011\u00142\u00124\u00ff\u001f5\u0012\u0015\u001b\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u0016732\u00ff23\u0016\u0018\u0015\u0012\u0016\u00ff0!53278\u00ff\u0019\u0012\u0015\u0015\u00ff672\"7\u00ff\u0012\u00116\u00ff\u001a\u0012\u00163\u0015\u00ff\u001773\u00156\u00ff\u0014\u0016\u00ff#74\u00ff$%8\u00ff344\u00142\u001b\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff3\n\u00167\u00196\u00ff27\u00157367\u00ff\u00126657\u001b\u00ff2\u0012\u001b31\n >?@?\u00ffB?CDE\u00ffF?G\u00ffFEHIJHKF\u00ffLEFEHM?GEG\n\n\n\n\n\u001e\u00107\u00ff276\u00113523\u0016\u0011\u00ff\u0014\u000e7\u00167\u001b\u00ff\u0012\u0016\u00ff01234567\u00ff\u0012\u0016\u00ff%&'&\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff!5\u00124\u0018\u00151\u00ff\u001f743\u00177\u00ff3\u00ff6\u00113\u000e\u00157\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff\u001a3\u0017\u0012\u0015\u001276\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff6\u000e74\u00123\u0015\u00ff\u00144436\u0012\u0014\u00166\u00ff342\u001466\u00ff(7\u0016\u001123\u0015\n 7\u0019\u00ff\u00142\u0018\u00ff\u001c\u00116\u00ff\u001b)4\u001428\u00ff\u0012\u00164\u00155\u001b\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u001a5\u0015\u0015*6\u0012+7\u00ff\u00112\u0014\u0015\u001571\u00ff432\u00ff\u0012\u00166\u0012\u001b7\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u001b\u0012\u0016\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff2\u0014\u0014\u00178\u00ff\u00173\u001b7\u00ff\u0012\u0011\u00ff3\u00ff\u00177\u0017\u001423\u001f\u00157\u00ff276\u00113523\u0016\u0011\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff\u00173\u00161\n\u001c\u0016\u00ff3\u00ff6\u00113\u00117\u00177\u0016\u00118\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff276\u00113523\u0016\u0011\u00ff4\u0012\u00117\u001b\u00ff2\u00126\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff4\u00146\u00116\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff74\u0014\u0016\u0014\u0017\u00124\u00ff4\u00103\u0015\u00157\u0016\u000f76\u00ff36\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff2736\u0014\u0016\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff\u0012\u00116\u00ff4\u0015\u00146527\n,\u001e\u00107\u00ff\u001b74\u00126\u0012\u0014\u0016\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff4\u0015\u001467\u00ff\u001936\u00ff\u0016\u0014\u0011\u00ff73618\u00ff\u001f5\u0011\u00ff\u0012\u0016\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u001b31-6\u00ff4\u00103\u0015\u00157\u0016\u000f\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff74\u0014\u0016\u0014\u001718\u00ff4\u0014\u0016\u0011\u0012\u00165\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff672\"7\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff!53\u0015\u0012\u00111\u00ff\u001a\u0014\u0014\u001b\u00ff1\u00145\u00ff\u0015\u0014\"7\n3\u0011\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u000e2\u0012476\u00ff1\u00145\u00ff7.\u000e74\u0011\u00ff\u001036\u00ff\u001f74\u0014\u00177\u00ff\u0012\u0017\u000e\u001466\u0012\u001f\u001578/\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff6\u00113\u00117\u00177\u0016\u0011\u00ff63\u0012\u001b\u00ff,\u0013\u0012\u0011\u0010\u00ff\u001073\"1\u00ff\u0010732\u001168\u00ff\u00197-\"7\u00ff4\u0010\u001467\u0016\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff4\u0015\u001467\u00ff \u00ff\u001f5\u0011\n\u0016\u0014\u0011\u00ff\u001f7\u001a\u001427\u00ff\u000f\u0012\"\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u000f576\u00116\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u0014\u000e\u000e\u00142\u00115\u0016\u0012\u00111\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff0\u0014\u0012\u0016\u00ff56\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff3\u00ff\u001a\u0012\u00163\u0015\u00ff\u001773\u00158\u00ff\u001536\u0011\u00ff\u0011\u001436\u0011\u00ff\u00142\u00ff\u0014\u00167\u00ff\u0017\u001427\u00ff\u00177\u0017\u001421/\n\n\n 12345\u00ff7842\n\n\u001e\u00107\u00ff%98:::*6!5327*\u001a\u0014\u0014\u0011\u00ff\u001f5\u0012\u0015\u001b\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u0019\u0012\u0015\u0015\u00ff6\u0014\u0014\u0016\u00ff\u00113\u00187\u00ff\u0014\u0016\u00ff3\u00ff\u00167\u0019\u00ff2\u0014\u00157\u00ff36\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u001a5\u0011527\u00ff\u0010\u0014\u00177\u00ff\u0014\u001a\u00ff(\u0015\u00124\u0018\u00ff0\u0011273\u0017\u00ff0\u00115\u001b\u0012\u001468\u00ff3\u00ff4\u0014\u0016\u00117\u0016\u0011\n\u001732\u00187\u0011\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u0015\u0012\"7\u00ff6\u00144\u00123\u0015\u00ff67\u0015\u0015\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff4\u0014\u0017\u000e3\u00161\u00ff\u0011\u00103\u0011\u00ff\u000e\u00153\u00166\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff\u001123\u00166\u001a\u00142\u0017\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff6\u000e347\u00ff\u0012\u0016\u0011\u0014\u00ff\u0012\u00116\u00ff\u001073\u001b!532\u0011726\n(\u0015\u00124\u0018\u00ff0\u0011273\u0017\u00ff0\u00115\u001b\u0012\u00146\u00ff63\u0012\u001b\u00ff\u0012\u0016\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u00167\u00196\u00ff27\u00157367\u00ff\u0011\u00103\u0011\u00ff\u0012\u0011\u00ff\u000e\u00153\u00166\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff\u000e27672\"7\u00ff\u00173\u00161\u00ff\u0014\u001a\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u001f5\u0012\u0015\u001b\u0012\u0016\u000f-6\u00ff\u0010\u00126\u0011\u00142\u00124\u00ff\u001a73\u001152768\u00ff\u0012\u00164\u00155\u001b\u0012\u0016\u000f\n\u000e32\u00116\u00ff\u0014\u001a\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u001b\u0012\u0016\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff2\u0014\u0014\u00178\u00ff3\u0016\u0011\u0012!57\u00ff\u001a\u0012.\u00115276\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u00124\u0014\u0016\u00124\u00ff\u00112\u0014\u0015\u001571\u00ff432\u00ff\u001e\u00107\u00ff6\u000e3476\u00ff\u0019\u0012\u0015\u0015\u00ff\u001f7\u00ff27\u000e52\u000e\u001467\u001b\u00ff36\u00ff\u000e2\u0014\u001b54\u0011\u0012\u0014\u0016\u00ff67\u00116\u00ff\u001a\u00142\n\u000e\u0014\u001b436\u001168\u00ff6\u0010\u00142\u0011*\u001a\u00142\u0017\u00ff\"\u0012\u001b7\u00148\u00ff\u0015\u0012\"7\u00ff6\u0010\u0014\u000e\u000e\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u001f2\u00143\u001b436\u00116\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u0014\u0011\u001072\u00ff\u001b\u0012\u000f\u0012\u00113\u0015\u00ff4\u0014\u0016\u00117\u0016\u00118\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff4\u0014\u0017\u000e3\u00161\u00ff63\u0012\u001b\n\u001e\u00107\u00ff\u00167\u0019\u00ff6\u00115\u001b\u0012\u0014\u00ff\u0019\u0012\u0015\u0015\u00ff\u0012\u00164\u00155\u001b7\u00ff\u00175\u0015\u0011\u0012\u000e\u00157\u00ff4273\u0011\u00142\u00ff67\u001168\u00ff\u000e\u0014\u001b436\u0011\u00ff2\u0014\u0014\u001768\u00ff\u000e\u0010\u0014\u0011\u0014\u000f23\u000e\u00101\u00ff65\u0012\u0011768\u00ff7\"7\u0016\u0011\u00ff6\u000e347\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u001b7\u001b\u001243\u00117\u001b\u00ff\u001f23\u0016\u001b\n6\u00115\u001b\u0012\u00146\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff4\u0014\u0017\u000e3\u0016\u001276\u00ff\u0015\u0014\u0014\u0018\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff76\u00113\u001f\u0015\u00126\u0010\u00ff3\u00ff\u0015\u0014\u0016\u000f*\u001172\u0017\u00ff4\u0014\u0016\u00117\u0016\u0011\u00ff\u000e2767\u0016478\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff4\u0014\u0017\u000e3\u00161\u00ff63\u0012\u001b\u00ff\u001e\u00107\u00ff\u001a34\u0012\u0015\u0012\u00111\u00ff\u00126\u00ff\u001b76\u0012\u000f\u00167\u001b\u00ff\u0011\u0014\n65\u000e\u000e\u00142\u0011\u00ff4\u0014\u0016\u00117\u0016\u0011\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff\u000e\u00153\u0011\u001a\u00142\u00176\u00ff654\u0010\u00ff36\u00ff\u001e\u0012\u0018\u001e\u0014\u0018\u00ff0\u0010\u0014\u000e8\u00ff\u001d\u00173+\u0014\u00168\u00ff347\u001f\u0014\u0014\u0018\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u0017\u001427\n(\u0014\u0017\u000e3\u00161\u00ff\u0014\u001a\u001a\u00124\u00123\u00156\u00ff631\u00ff\u0011\u00107\u00ff\u000e2\u0014074\u0011\u00ff3\u0012\u00176\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u00ff\u000e\u00146\u0012\u0011\u0012\u0014\u0016\u00ff01234567\u00ff36\u00ff3\u00ff\u00105\u001f\u00ff\u001a\u00142\u00ff\u0012\u0016\u001a\u001557\u0016472\u00ff\u001732\u00187\u0011\u0012\u0016\u000f8\u00ff6\u0010\u0014\u000e\u000e3\u001f\u00157\u00ff\"\u0012\u001b7\u0014\n4\u0014\u0017\u00177247\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u001b\u0012\u000f\u0012\u00113\u0015\u00ff4\u0014\u0016\u00117\u0016\u0011\u00ff\u000e2\u0014\u001b54\u0011\u0012\u0014\u00168\u00ff672\"\u0012\u0016\u000f\u00ff\u001f\u0014\u0011\u0010\u00ff\u0015\u001443\u0015\u00ff\u001f56\u0012\u001676676\u00ff3\u0016\u001b\u00ff\u00163\u0011\u0012\u0014\u00163\u0015\u00ff\u001f23\u0016\u001b6\n(\u0015\u00124\u0018\u00ff0\u0011273\u0017\u00ff0\u00115\u001b\u0012\u00146\u00ff\u00126\u00ff3\u00ff\u001b\u0012\"\u00126\u0012\u0014\u0016\u00ff\u0014\u001a\u00ff;2\u0014\u0019\u0011\u0010\u00ff<\u0014\u001b7\u00ff\u001e74\u0010\u0016\u0014\u0015\u0014\u000f\u001276\u00ff==(8\u00ff3\u00ff01234567*\u001f367\u001b\u00ff\u001f56\u0012\u0016766\u00ff\u001174\u0010\u0016\u0014\u0015\u0014\u000f1\u00ff4\u0014\u0017\u000e3\u00161\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 49 of 77 PageID 200\n\n\n\n\n 01234\u00ff67\n89 \u00ff\u000e\u000f\n\u0010\u0011 \u00ff\u0012\u0013\u0014\u00ff\u0010\u0012\u0015\u0016\u00ff\u0017\u0016\u0018\u0019\u001a\u0013\u000f\n8\u0014\u001b\u0016\u0019\u001a\u000f\u0016\u00ff\u001c\u001a\u0011\u00ff\u000f\n\u001d 9\u000f\u00ff\u0012\u00ff8\u0014\u001b\u0012\u0013\u001e\u0016\u00ff\u001f\u0016\u0014\u001a\u0012\u00ff\u0016\u001c\u00ff! \u0019\"\n# \u0013\u0012\u001e\u00ff\u000e\u000f\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 50 of 77 PageID 201\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000050\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 51 of 77 PageID 202\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000051\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 52 of 77 PageID 203\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000053\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 53 of 77 PageID 204\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000054\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 54 of 77 PageID 205\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000055\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 55 of 77 PageID 206\n \u00ec\u00ed\u00ee\n\u00d4\u00d5\u00d6\u00d7\u00ff\u00d9\u00da\u00db \u00dc\u00dd\u00de\u00df\u00e0\u00ff\u00dc\u00e2\u00e3\u00e4\u00e5\u00ff\u00e6\u00e7\u00e8\u00e9\u00ff\u00e2\u00de\u00ea\u00e9\u00dd\u00eb\u00ff\u00e0\u00e9\u00ea\u00e9\n \u00c9\u00ca\u00cb\u00cc\u00cd\u00ca\u00ce\u00c9\u00ff\u00cb\u00d0\u00d1\u00d2\u00d3\n \u00a7\u00a8\u00a9\u00aa\u00ff\u00a9\u00ac\u00ad\u00ff\u00ae\u00af\u00b0\u00ff\u00b1\u00a9\u00b2\u00aa\u00b2\u00b3\u00b4\u00ff\u00b5\u00af\u00ac\u00b6\u00ff\u00b7\u00af\u00b1\u00b3\u00b8\u00af\u00a9\u00b9\u00ff\u00aa\u00a8\u00ad\u00ff\u00b5\u00ac\u00ad\u00ad\u00ff\u00a7\u00ba\u00bb\u00bc\u00bd\u00ff\u00a9\u00be\u00be\u00ff\u00b5\u00af\u00ac\u00ff\u00bc\u00af\u00bf\u00b0\u00c0\u00ff\u00c1\u00c2\u00a9\u00c3\u00af\u00b3\u00ff\u00c4\u00b2\u00ac\u00ad\u00c0\u00ff\u00c1\u00be\u00be\u00b8\u00ad\u00ff\u00c5\u00c6\u00ff\u00a9\u00b3\u00b9\u00ff\u00ba\u00a9\u00c2\u00c7\u00b0\u00b3\u00b4\u00c8\n\n\n\n\njklmj\u00ffopqr\nrstuvwxyzx\u00ff{|x}~t|v\u00ffr\u007fu\u0080{y}}|\u00ffquty{~wxy\u00ffx\u007fuvy\u00ff\u0080y}x\u00ff\u0081y\u0082\u00ff\u0083|\u0084y\u00ffux\u00ff|\u0080|}u\u0083\u00ffv~\u0086\u007fu\u0081s\u00ff{w\u0087\n0\u00101\u00112\u0012\u00ff\u001345\n 6789\u00ff\u0019\u001a\u001b\u00ff\u0019\u000e\u001a\u000f\u0019\u001c\u00ff\u001d\u00ff\u001a\u001e2\u001a\u001a\u00ff\u0010\u001f\u00ff!\"\n #$\u0015\u0017\u0014\u0013\u0015\u00142\u0015\u00ff\u00162\u0017\u00ff\u0016\u0018\u00ff\n \u0017\u0018\u00ff\u0019\u001a\u001b\u00ff\u0019\u001a\u0019\u001c\u00ff\u001d\u00ff\u001a\u001c2%\u001c\u00ff\u0010\u001f\u00ff!\"\n&'()*\n\n+,-./0+12\u00ff45,5\u00ff67+,-89:;\u00ff<\u00ff.\u00ff=>?@A>?@\u00ff+BCDEFGH\u00ffID@JKDCL\u00ffMG\u00ffNHAAM@N\u00ffD\u00ffGHE>@J\u00ffIMOH5\u00ff9PH\u00ffO>CKHC\u00ff+QDNPHAAM\u00ff7DCHP>FGH\u00ffEI>GHJ\u00ffMAG\u00ffJ>>CG\u00ffDA\u00ffAPH\nH@J\u00ff>O\u00ffRSRT2\u00ffUFA\u00ffD\u00ffODGA8NC>?M@N\u00ffJMNMADI\u00ffE>KQD@B\u00ffMG\u00ffGAHQQM@N\u00ffFQ5\nV7H\u00ffO>F@J\u00ffAPMG\u00ffGQDEH\u00ffUHEDF\u0088 \u0089\u008a\u008b\u00ff\n \u0098G\u009dH\u0097\u00ff?H\n \u008d\u008eD\u008f\u0090CA\u0091H\u0092J\u0093\u00ffM\u00ff@\u0094\u00ff\u008aAP\u0095M\u00ffG\u0096\u0090\n \u0091\u009f\u00ffG\u0090A\u009f\u0090\n \u0097\u0091\u00ff\u0098\u0095\u0093\u008f\u0091\u0090\u0093\u0093\u0099\u00ff\u009a\u0090CH\u0092\u00ff\u00ffI\u009b>>LM@N\u00ffO>C\u00ffK>CH\u00ff>QAM>@G\u00ffA>\u00ffHWQD@J2X\u00ffGD\u00a1M\u00a2J\u00a3\u00ff\u00ff\u00a5YD\n \u00ff\u0096\u0097\u008f\u008e\u0097\u009f\u009f\u00ffU\u009dF\u0090G\u0093M@\u0093\u00ffH\u009cG\u008aG\u009d\u00ffD\u00ff\u0090@\u009eJ\u0090\u00ff?\u009d\u0094H\u00ff\u008a?H\n \u0091\u0090\u00ff\u008a\u0091 \u00a6AA\u00ffYDGFC2\u00ffO>F@JHC\u00ff>O\u00ffZ[\\]^\n_`abcd\u00ff_`fg\\hi5 \u0094 \u008a \u0095 \u009d\n \u00ff\u0092\u0090 \u0097 \u0096\u0099\n APPENDIX 000058\n\f Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 56 of 77 PageID 207\n\n\n\n\n:\u00ff;\u00ff:<\n 012\u00ff456278\u00ff9\u00ff8562\u00ff\u000e6\u000f\u00105\u0011\u0011\u0012\u00ff\u0013625\u00101\u00145\u00ff\u00106\u00ff\u0015554\u00ff145\u00ff1\u0016\u00ff\u00171\u00184\u00111\u00184\u0019\u00ff\u001a1\u0011\u00ff25\u001b1\u000f4\u0012\u001c6\u001575\u00ff\u000e1\u0011\u001d\u00ff\u001e\u0014\u0011\u00ff6\u001f52\u00ff\u001b71\u00124\u000f\u00ff6\u0011\u00ff\u0011\u00105\u00ff54\u0017\u00ff1\u0016\u00ff5\u001b5\u001a\u001552\u00ff!!\"\n \u0011\u00105\u00ff\u0012\u001b14\u0012\u001b\u00ff\u0015\u0014\u00127\u0017\u00124\u000f\u00ff\u0012\u00ff\u00155\u00124\u000f\u00ff25\u0012\u001a6\u000f\u001245\u0017\u00ff41\u0011\u00ff6\u00ff6\u00ff25\u00116\u0014264\u0011\u00ff\u0015\u0014\u0011\u00ff6\u00ff6\u00ff\u001b256\u0011\u0012#5\u00ff\u000e21\u0017\u0014\u001b\u0011\u001214\u00ff\u001056\u0017$\u001462\u001152\u00ff\u001612\u00ff%7\u0012\u001b&\u00ff\u0011256\u001a\u00ff\u0011\u0014\u0017\u00121\u001d\n '\u00105\u00ff\u001b14\u001154\u0011\u00ff\u001a62&5\u0011\u00124\u000f\u00ff64\u0017\u00ff7\u0012#5\u00ff1\u001b\u001267\u00ff577\u00124\u000f\u00ff\u001b1\u001a\u000e648\u00ff\u001812&\u00ff\u0018\u0012\u0011\u0010\u00ff\u0017\u0012(5254\u0011\u00ff\u0015264\u0017\u00ff64\u0017\u00ff\u001b256\u001112\u00ff64\u0017\u00ff671\u00ff\u00106\u00ff\u0012\u0011\u00ff1\u00184\u00ff\u000e1\u0017\u001b6\u0011\u00ff\u001b6775\u0017\u00ff)11\u0017\n *5\u0018 \u00ff+12&\u001d\n 0123456738395\n\n\n\n\n ,\u00135\u00ff\u00161\u001b\u0014\u00ff14\u00ff\u001a6&\u00124\u000f\u00ff#\u0012\u001751\u00ff64\u0017\u00ff1\u001b\u001267\u00ff\u001a5\u0017\u00126\u00ff\u001b14\u001154\u0011\u00ff\u001612\u00ff\u0015\u0014\u001245 5 \u00ff\u000e2\u0012\u001a62\u001278\u001d\u00ff\u00135\u00ff625\u00ff671\u00ff#528\u00ff\u001056#8\u00ff\u00124\u00111\u00ff\u001a6&\u00124\u000f\u00ff\u000e1\u0017\u001b6\u0011-\u00ff.6\u00142\u00ff6\u0012\u0017\u001d\n .6\u00142\u00ff6\u0012\u0017\u00ff\u0011\u00106\u0011\u00ff\u0012\u0011\u00ff\u001864\u0019\u0011\u00ff/\u0014\u0011\u00ff\u0011\u00105\u00ff71\u001b6\u0011\u001214\u00ff\u0011\u00106\u0011\u00ff\u001111\u0017\u00ff1\u0014\u0011\u00ff\u0015\u0014\u0011\u00ff\u0011\u00105\u00ff\u0012\u001c5\u00ff1\u0016\u00ff\u0011\u00105\u00ff\u000e6\u001b5\u00ff\u001111\u001d\n 0123456738395\n\n =>?@\u00ffB>CD\u00ffE F\n GHIJH\u00ffLMNMOL\u00ffPQ\u00ffRQM\u00ffSOTUISO\u00ffNR\u00ffVW\u00ffMQ\u00ffXQMO\u00ffIRYZOSLQR[\n =>?@\u00ffB>CD\u00ffE F\n\n \\]^_\u00ffa_bcd\u00ffef\u00ffg F\n \\]^_\u00ffa_bcd\u00ffef\u00ffg\n APPENDIX 000059\n\f0123\u00ff567Case\n 896 \u00ff\u000e3:25-cv-02727-E\n \u000f9\u00ff8\u0010\u00ff6\u000e3\u00116\u000f9\u00ff\u00123 \u0013\u00ff\u000f6\u000e9\u00ff6Document\n \u00ff739\u000e855\u0014\u00ff5678915\n 3\u0010\u00ff\u00ff\u00156Filed\n \u0016 96\u001603/13/26\n \u00ff\u0017\u0014\u000e87\u0018\u000f3\u00ff\u00168\u000f\u00ff\u0010Page\n 385\u00ff6\u000e\u00ff\u0018\u000f57\n \u0019\u00ff\u001a\u0018of\n 9\u00ff9277\n 3 \u00ff\u001b\u0018\u000f9\u00ff9PageID\n 23\u00ff\u000f\u001c3\u00ff6\u00ff92208\n 3\u00ff\u000f\u001d873\n\u0013\u001e \u0013\u00ff\u0018\u000f\u00ff855\u00ff\u001f \u0010\u000f\u00ff6\u00ff6\u001d96 \u000f\u00ff96\u00ff\u00106\u00ff8\u00ff\u0016\u00103\u00ff\u001e8\u000e39\u0014\u00ff6\u00ff92 \u0013\u000f\u0019\u00ff3\u00ff8\u000e3\u00ff879\u0018855\u0014\u00ff\u00136 \u0013\u00ff96\u00ff28\u001e3\u00ff8\u00ff3\u001e39\u00ff\u000f\u001d873\u00ff8\u000f\u00ff\u0016355\u0019\u00ff\u00176\u00ff\u00163\u00ff\u001655\u00ff\u00123\u00ff8\u001253\u00ff96\u00ff28\u001e3\n3\u001e39\u000f\u00ff923\u000e3\u00ff\u0012\u00189\u00ff9\u00ff\u001655\u00ff\u00123\u00ff78\u00113\u000e8\u00ff8\u0010\u00ff59\u00ff\u0018\u001d\u00ff\u000f6\u00ff\u00163\u00ff78\u00ff\u000e376\u000e\u0010\u00ff8\u0010\u00ff5\u001e3\u000f9\u000e38\u0011\u00ff926\u000f3\u00ff3\u001e39\u000f\u00ff\u00ff2\u00132\u00ff!\u0018859\u0014\u00ff96\u00ff\u001d36\u001d53\u00ff\u001626\u00ff8\u000e3\"9\u00ff23\u000e3#\u00ff$8\u000f\u0018\u000e\n\u000f8\u0010\u0019\n123\u00ff3\u0016\u00ff\u000f\u001d873\u00ff\u001655\u00ff75\u0018\u00103\u00ff7\u000e3896\u000e\u00ff\u000f39\u000f\u00ff\u001d6\u001078\u000f9\u00ff\u000e66\u0011\u000f\u00ff8\u0010\u00ff\u001d\u000e6\u0010\u0018796 \u00ff\u000f9\u0018\u00106\u000f\u0019\n012\u000f\u00ff\u00118\u000f\u000f\u001e3\u00ff\u000f\u001d873\u00ff\u0013\u001e3\u000f\u00ff\u0018\u000f\u00ff923\u00ff78\u001d8\u001259\u0014\u00ff96\u00ff28\u001e3\u00ff9289\u00ff\u000f39\u00ff\u0018\u001d\u00ff855\u00ff\u00ff6 3\u00ff\u001d5873\u0019\u00ff%8923\u000e\u00ff928\u00ff\u0012\u00185\u0010 \u0013\u00ff\u000f39\u000f\u00ff\u00ff6 3\u00ff9 \u0014\u00ff\u000e66\u0011\u00ff3872\u00ff9\u00113\u00ff\u00163\u00ff\u001655\n 6\u0016\u00ff28\u001e3\u00ff923\u0011\u00ff855\u00ff6\u001e3\u000e\u00ff923\u00ff\u0012\u00185\u0010 \u0013\u00ff8\u0010\u00ff\u00163\u00ff78\u00ff\u001b\u0018\u000f9\u00ff9\u0018\u000e\u00ff923\u00ff78\u00113\u000e8\u000f\u00ff\u00ff\u0010&3\u000e39\u00ff\u0010\u000e3796 \u000f\u00ff8\u0010\u00ff28\u001e3\u00ff926\u000f3\u00ff6\u001d96 \u000f\u00ff6\u000e\u00ff6\u0018\u000e\u00ff7539\u000f#\u00ff$8\u000f\u0018\u000e\n\u000f8\u0010\u0019\n123\u00ff\u00116\u000e3\u00ff928\u00ff'()))*\u000f!\u00188\u000e3*669\u00ff\u000f\u001d873\u00ff\u000f\u00ff553\u0010\u00ff\u001692\u00ff\u0017\u0014\u000e87\u0018\u000f3\u00ff2\u000f96\u000e\u0014\u0019\n hijklmnokpkqm\n\n\n\n\n0 3\u00ff56\u001e3\u00ff\u000f6\u00ff\u0011\u001872\u00ff6\u00ff923\u00ff3+\u000f9 \u0013\u00ff\u0010376\u000e\u00ff923\u00ff6\u000e\u0013 85\u00ff\u0012\u000e7\u001f\u00ff6\u00ff923\u00ff\u0012\u00185\u0010 \u0013#\u00ff$8\u000f\u0018\u000e\u00ff\u000f8\u0010\u0019\n 253\u00ff923\u00ff\u000f\u001d873\u00ff\u000f\u00ff728\u0013 \u0013\u00ff\u000f6\u00113\u00ff6\u00ff9\u000f\u00ff\u00116\u000f9\u00ff76 7\u00ff389\u0018\u000e3\u000f\u00ff8\u000e3\"9\u00ff\u00136 \u0013\u00ff8\u0014\u001623\u000e3\u00ff75\u0018\u0010 \u0013\u00ff923\u00ff\u000e3\u000f98\u0018\u000e89\"\u000f\u00ff8\u00116\u0018\u000f\u00ff9\u000e6553\u0014\u0019\n0123\u00ff\u00126 3\u000f\u00ff6\u00ff923\u00ff\u0012\u00185\u0010 \u0013\u00ff923\u00ff58\u00146\u00189\u00ff92 \u0013\u000f\u00ff5\u001f3\u00ff9289\u00ff\u001d36\u001d53\u00ff8\u000e3\u00ff\u00136 \u0013\u00ff96\u00ff\u000e376\u0013 \u001c3\u00ff8\u000f\u00ff\u001e3\u000e\u0014\u00ff\u0011\u001872\u00ff9289\u00ff76 7\u00ff\u0017\u001d8\u00132399\u00ff8\u000e326\u0018\u000f3#\u00ff$8\u000f\u0018\u000e\n\u000f8\u0010\u0019\n,57\u001f\u00ff\u00179\u000e38\u0011\u00ff\u00179\u0018\u00106\u000f\u00ff\u000f8\u0010\u00ff9\u00ff\u001655\u00ff\u00123\u00ff538\u000f \u0013\u00ff923\u00ff\u000e\u000f9\u00ff566\u000e\u00ff\u001623\u000e3\u00ff\u0017\u001d8\u00132399\u00ff8\u000e326\u0018\u000f3\u00ff6 73\u00ff\u000f966\u0010\u00ff6\u000e\u00ff923\u00ff3+9\u00ff\u000f3\u001e3\u000e85\u00ff\u001438\u000e\u000f\u0019\u00ff123\u00ff5\u001e \u0013\u00ff\u000f\u001d873\n8\u00126\u001e3\u00ff\u001655\u00ff\u000f98\u0014\u00ff923\u00ff\u000f8\u00113\u0019\n hijklmnokpkqm\n\n\n\n\nrs\n123t\u00ffu\u00ff\n 76ws\n \u0011\u001dx8y\u00ffz\u0014\u00ff\u000f\u00ff3+\u001d3793\u0010\u00ff96\u00ff6\u001d3\u00ff\u0012\u0014\u00ff923\u00ff3\u0010\u00ff6\u00ff-3\u0012\u000e\u00188\u000e\u0014\u00ff.).(\u0019\n{|}~|\u00ff\u0080\u0081\u0082\u0081\u0083\u0080\u00ff\u0084 \u00ff\u0086 \u0081\u00ff\u0087\u0083\u0088\u0089}\u0087\u0083\u00ff\u0082\u0086\u00ff\u008a\u008b\u00ff\u0081\u00ff\u008c \u0081\u0083\u00ff}\u0086\u008d\u008e\u0083\u0087\u0080\u0086\u008f\nrs/t00\u00ff\n u\u00ffws\n /2\u00ffxy\u00ffz654450\u00ff278495\u00ff7:\u00ff;77;<5\n 345\n\n \u0090\u0091\u0092\u0093\u00ff\u0095\u0093\u0096\u0097\u0098\u00ff\u0099\u009a\u00ff\u009b\n=>?@ABCDE\u00ffGHGI\u00ffJKLMENA\u00ffOKPBN\u00ffQRST\u00ffUVV\u00ffABCDEM\u00ffAKMKAWKPT\u00ffXDBM\u00ffYNEKABNV\u00ffYN@\u00ffR>E\u00ffZK\u00ff?[ZVBMDKP\\\u00ffZA>NPSNME\\\u00ffAK]ABEEKR\\\u00ff>A\u00ffAKPBMEABZ[EKPT\n \u0090\u0091\u0092\u0093\u00ff\u0095\u0093\u0096\u0097\u0098\u00ff\u0099\u009a\u00ff\u009b\n^_`a^`bcd\u00fff`agcag\n APPENDIX 000060\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 58 of 77 PageID 209\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff, \u00a7\n \u00a7\nv. \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC, \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Defendant. \u00a7\n\n UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK\n\n Casey S. Erick, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1746 hereby declares as follows:\n\n 1. I am over 18 years of age, of sound mind, and otherwise competent to make this\n\nDeclaration. The evidence set out in the foregoing Declaration is based on my personal knowledge.\n\n 2. I am lead counsel for Plaintiff and submit this Declaration in support of Plaintiff\u2019s\n\nMotion for Default Judgment and claim for attorney\u2019s fees.\n\n 3. I am a partner in the law firm of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP, the firm\n\nthat represents Plaintiff in the above-referenced lawsuit. Prior to joining Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard\n\n& Smith, LLP, I was a partner at Cowles & Thompson, P.C.\n\n 4. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein and, if called to testify, would\n\ncompetently testify thereto.\n\n 5. Plaintiff, Spaghetti Warehouse, is a well-known restaurant chain that is a Texas\n\ncorporation with its principal place of business in Dallas, Texas.\n\n 6. Defendant is a New York limited liability company with its principal place of\n\nbusiness in Rye, New York. I am familiar with the Defendant and its owners.\n\n\n\n\n173216891.1 UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK \u2013 PAGE 1\n\n APPENDIX 000061\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 59 of 77 PageID 210\n\n\n\n 7. This action arises under the Lanham Act and related statutes; the Court has subject-\n\nmatter jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1121(a), 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1331, 1332(a)(1), 1338(a)-(b), and\n\nsupplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1367(a). I personally drafted all of the pleadings in\n\nthis lawsuit and have performed all of the legal work required to obtain this default judgment.\n\n 8. On October 7, 2025, I filed Plaintiff\u2019s Original Complaint for Permanent and\n\nInjunctive Relief, Damages, and Other Relief. (Doc. 1).\n\n 9. On October 8, 2025, the Court issued a Summons as to Defendant, Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC. (Doc. 6).\n\n 10. On October 27, 2025, in accordance with the Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, Defendant was\n\nserved, and the Return of Service was filed on November 12, 2025. (Doc. 8).\n\n 11. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i), Defendant was required to file an answer\n\nor other responsive pleading within 21 days after being served. Because service was affected on\n\nOctober 27, 2025, Defendant's answer or other responsive pleading was due on or before\n\nNovember 17, 2025.\n\n 12. On December 5, 2025, the Clerk of the Court entered a default against Defendant.\n\n(Doc. 12).\n\n 13. To date, Defendant has failed to file an answer or other responsive pleading within\n\nthe time required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i).\n\n 14. As previously sworn, Defendant is not an infant, incompetent person, in active\n\nmilitary service of the United States of America or its officers or agents. (Doc. 11).\n\n 15. Plaintiff retained me to represent it in connection with this lawsuit.\n\n 16. Plaintiff agreed to pay my firm on an hourly basis. Payment of attorneys\u2019 fees was\n\nnot contingent on the outcome of the litigation. True and correct copies of the invoices submitted\n\n\n\n\n173216891.1 UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK \u2013 PAGE 2\n\n APPENDIX 000062\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 60 of 77 PageID 211\n\n\n\nby my prior firm and this firm in this matter reflecting the services performed and fees charged,\n\nredacted to protect privileged and confidential matters, are attached hereto. The invoices reflect\n\nthe actual work performed by myself, and other lawyers and staff with detailed descriptions of the\n\nservices provided. The work consisted of: (i) investigating Plaintiff\u2019s claims; (ii) corresponding\n\nand communicating with Plaintiff, Defendant and other third parties; (iii) preparing and filing the\n\nOriginal and other litigation documents; and (iv) pursuing default judgment against Defendant.\n\n 17. My hourly rate for this matter is $350.00 per hour.\n\n 18. I have been licensed to practice law in the State of Texas since 2002, and I am\n\nBoard Certified in Civil Trial Law since 2023.\n\n 19. Since 2002, I have been continuously and actively engaged in the practice of law\n\nthroughout the State of Texas. My practice has consisted primarily of complex commercial\n\nlitigation that includes intellectual property and federal court litigation. Based on my experience,\n\nI am familiar with the reasonable and customary charges for legal services, in the Dallas, Texas\n\narea in this type of action. I am familiar with the reasonable attorneys\u2019 fees for the same or similar\n\nwork that has been performed in connection with this matter. My hourly rate is both customary\n\nand reasonable in the Dallas, Texas market for the types of rendered and my experience level.\n\n 20. Plaintiff seeks recovery of its attorneys\u2019 fees and costs incurred in defending its\n\ncopyrights and trademarks pursuant to breach of contract law, the Copyright Act and, alternatively\n\nunder the Lanham Act.\n\n 21. The majority of the time reflected in the attached invoices was necessary for the\n\npursuit of Plaintiff\u2019s copyright and trademark claims against Defendant.\n\n 22. After filing suit, it was very difficult finding and serving the Defendant. They did\n\nnot accept service and would not respond to any requests to accept service.\n\n\n\n\n173216891.1 UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK \u2013 PAGE 3\n\n APPENDIX 000063\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 61 of 77 PageID 212\n\n\n\n 23. Eventually, I had to serve the Defendant at their work addresses as they are both\n\nlicensed attorneys. It was only then did they communicate with me about this lawsuit.\n\n 24. Despite numerous attempts to try and resolve this matter, or obtain any information\n\nfrom Defendant to determine Plaintiff\u2019s measure of damages, Defendant refused to participate and,\n\nto date, has not filed any response to the lawsuit or provided any information, even though it is\n\ncontractually obligated.\n\n 25. I have also analyzed the reasonableness of the fees in light of the following factors\n\nset out in Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 488 F.2d 714, 717-7109 (5th Cir. 1974). The\n\nJohnson factors include: (1) the time and labor required; (2) the novelty and difficulty of the\n\nquestions; (3) the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly; (4) the preclusion of other\n\nemployment by the attorney due to acceptance of the case; (5) the customary fee; (6) whether the\n\nfee is fixed or contingent; (7) time limitations imposed by the client or the circumstances; (8) the\n\namount involved and the results obtained; (9) the experience, reputation, and ability of the\n\nattorneys; (10) the undesirability of the case; (11) the nature and length of the professional\n\nrelationship with the client; and (12) awards in similar cases. Based on my analysis of the above\n\nfactors, which I discuss below, I find that the fees Plaintiff seeks to recover are reasonable and\n\nwere necessary.\n\n 26. Factor 1 (Time and Labor Required): Plaintiff was required to retain attorneys\n\nspecializing in copyright and trademark litigation to pursue its claims in this matter. The firm\n\nfocused its efforts on obtaining a quick and efficient resolution of all claims in this matter. In light\n\nof Plaintiff\u2019s objective to obtain injunctive relief preventing Defendant\u2019s ongoing infringement,\n\nthe firm worked extremely efficiently to obtain the desired result, and its fees were reasonable in\n\nlight of time and labor required to pursue the claims.\n\n\n\n\n173216891.1 UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK \u2013 PAGE 4\n\n APPENDIX 000064\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 62 of 77 PageID 213\n\n\n\n 27. Factor 2 & 3 (Novelty and Difficulty of the Questions/Skill Required): The proper\n\npursuit of Plaintiff\u2019s claims in this matter required expertise in copyright and trademark litigation,\n\nwhich expertise the firm provided. Although the case presented no questions that were particularly\n\nnovel or difficult, the firm\u2019s fees were relatively low in light of the results sought, and were\n\ntherefore reasonable under this factor.\n\n 28. Factor 4 (Preclusion of other Employment): Other than time spent working on this\n\nmatter, the firm\u2019s engagement on this matter has not precluded the firm\u2019s attorneys from working\n\non other matters. However, based on my experience, the firm\u2019s fees were reasonable in light of\n\nthis factor because, as discussed above, the fees are set at market rates for intellectual property\n\nlitigation in the Dallas, Texas area.\n\n 29. Factors 5 & 12 (Customary Fee/Awards in Similar Cases): I have handled several\n\ncopyright and trademark matters through judgment and default judgment. Although every matter\n\nis unique, I believe that the firm\u2019s fees charged pursuing this matter are equal to or less than the\n\nfees that would customarily be charged in the Dallas, Texas market to obtain similar results.\n\n 30. Factor 6 (Whether the Fee Was Fixed or Contingent): The fee charged in this matter\n\nwas neither fixed or contingent on the results obtained. In light of the fact that the firm\u2019s rates are\n\nset to match the market and the amount of time spent on this matter were reasonable, the fees\n\ncharged were reasonable in light of this factor.\n\n 31. Factor 7 (Time Limitations Imposed by the Client or Circumstances): Given\n\nDefendant\u2019s infringing activity despite termination notices Plaintiff, desired to get relief; as\n\nquickly and efficiently as possible. Defendant\u2019s failure to timely appear or participate has made\n\nthat particularly challenging. The firm\u2019s fees are reasonable in light of this factor.\n\n\n\n\n173216891.1 UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK \u2013 PAGE 5\n\n APPENDIX 000065\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 63 of 77 PageID 214\n\n\n\n 32. Factor 8 (Amount Involved and Results Obtained): The amount of money\n\ninvolved in Defendant\u2019s breach and infringement has been difficult to determine in light of\n\nDefendant\u2019s refusal to timely appear and participate in discovery. In addition to fees, Plaintiff is\n\nseeking both injunctive relief and statutory damages, in addition to orders requiring Defendant to\n\nproduce financial records which it was contractually obligated to do under the License Agreement\n\nso that Plaintiff can determine the exact amount of licensing fees. The fees sought are reasonable\n\nin light of the relief sought.\n\n 33. Factor 9 (Experience, Reputation, and Ability of Attorneys): The rates charged by\n\nthe firm were also reasonable considering the experience, reputation and abilities of the lawyers\n\nperforming the services. All timekeepers who performed work on this matter were qualified and\n\ntheir rates were commensurate with their levels of experience, as discussed above.\n\n 34. Factor 10 (Undesirability of the Case): Although I would not characterize the case\n\nas undesirable, Defendant\u2019s refusal to timely appear and participate has presented frustration and\n\nchallenges of its own. Especially when the determination of damages relies on the records which\n\nDefendant has not produced. This factor therefore supports the reasonableness of the firm\u2019s fees.\n\n 35. Factor 11 (Nature and Length of Client Relationship): The firm\u2019s fees in this matter\n\nare also reasonable in light of the nature and length of its relationship with Plaintiff. Plaintiff\n\nengaged the firm, and the undersigned attorney, to pursue this matter as well as provide other legal\n\nservices since 2020. Plaintiff has continued to place its trust and confidence in the undersigned\n\nattorney, and this firm, and further supports the argument that the fees charged are reasonable in\n\nlight of the level of service provided and results obtained, including in this matter.\n\n\n\n\n173216891.1 UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK \u2013 PAGE 6\n\n APPENDIX 000066\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 64 of 77 PageID 215\n\n\n\n 36. In light of the above, I am of the opinion that the fees charged by in the amount of\n\n$22,434.50 in pursuing this matter on behalf of Plaintiff were reasonable, and the tasks performed\n\nwere necessary under the circumstances\n\n 37. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed\n\non March 13, 2026.\n\n\n\n _________________________\n\n\n\n\n173216891.1 UNSWORN DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK \u2013 PAGE 7\n\n APPENDIX 000067\n\fBill and Payment Report Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 65 of 77 PageID 216 Last Payment (02/16/2026): 4,270.00\n\nBLD Brands (11922) 03/09/2026\n\n\n Invoice Matter Matter Description Type Date Time Cost Total Balance Status Check No. Check Date Payor Email\n\n 375163 77590 Rosebriar Stemmons, LP v. BLD Invoice 03/11/2020\n Brands\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000068\nConfidential - for internal purposes only. Page 1\n\fBill and Payment Report Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 66 of 77 PageID 217 Last Payment (02/16/2026): 4,270.00\n\nBLD Brands (11922) 03/09/2026\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000069\nConfidential - for internal purposes only. Page 2\n\fBill and Payment Report Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 67 of 77 PageID 218 Last Payment (02/16/2026): 4,270.00\n\nBLD Brands (11922) 03/09/2026\n\n\n\n\n 430033 82146 General Invoice 12/23/2024 1,015.00 0.00 1,015.00 1,015.00 Paid\n 430033 82146 General Payment 04/10/2025 -1,015.00 0.00 -1,015.00 0.00 704246 04/03/2025 Warehouse 72\n 434937 82146 General Invoice 05/13/2025 350.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 Paid\n 434937 82146 General Payment 02/16/2026 -350.00 0.00 -350.00 0.00 504965 02/03/2026 Spaghetti Warehouse\n 436705 82575 Spaghetti Warehouse New York Invoice 07/07/2025 1,470.00 0.00 1,470.00 1,470.00 Paid\n\n APPENDIX 000070\nConfidential - for internal purposes only. Page 3\n\fBill and Payment Report Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 68 of 77 PageID 219 Last Payment (02/16/2026): 4,270.00\n\nBLD Brands (11922) 03/09/2026\n\n\n Invoice Matter Matter Description Type Date Time Cost Total Balance Status Check No. Check Date Payor Email\n\n 436705 82575 Spaghetti Warehouse New York Payment 02/16/2026 -1,470.00 0.00 -1,470.00 0.00 504965 02/03/2026 Spaghetti Warehouse\n 438215 82575 Spaghetti Warehouse New York Invoice 08/08/2025 70.00 0.00 70.00 70.00 Paid\n 438215 82575 Spaghetti Warehouse New York Payment 02/16/2026 -70.00 0.00 -70.00 0.00 504965 02/03/2026 Spaghetti Warehouse\n 440057 82575 Spaghetti Warehouse New York Invoice 10/20/2025 2,380.00 0.00 2,380.00 2,380.00 Paid\n 440057 82575 Spaghetti Warehouse New York Payment 02/16/2026 -2,380.00 0.00 -2,380.00 0.00 504965 02/03/2026 Spaghetti Warehouse\n 440935 82575 Spaghetti Warehouse New York Invoice 11/13/2025 2,245.00 1,149.50 3,394.50 3,394.50 Open\nReport Totals: 2,245.00 1,149.50 3,394.50\n\n\n\n\n APPENDIX 000071\nConfidential - for internal purposes only. Page 4\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 69 of 77 PageID 220\n\n\n\n\n Unreleased: 5.10\n Friday, March 13\n Total Time: 5.10\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 5.10\n DRAFT\n Finalize motion, brief, and exhibits in support of motion for\n default judgment.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 1.50\n Thursday, March 12\n Total Time: 1.50\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC 1.50\n Temporary Matter\n DRAFT\n Continue work on draft attorney's fees affidavit.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 1.70\n Tuesday, March 10\n Total Time: 1.70\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 1.70\n DRAFT\n Prepare draft of attorney's fees affidavit in support of motion for\n default judgment.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 3.00\n Monday, March 9\n Total Time: 3.00\n\n\n\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000072 1/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 70 of 77 PageID 221\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 3.00\n DRAFT\n Continued draft of motion for default and memorandum in\n support of default judgment.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 3.10\n Wednesday, February 25\n Total Time: 3.10\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 3.10\n DRAFT\n Finalize motion for default judgment with declaration of Doug\n Pak.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 2.80\n Tuesday, February 24\n Total Time: 2.80\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 2.80\n DRAFT\n Receipt and review of client's edits to draft motion for default\n judgment and default judgment.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 1.00\n Tuesday, February 17\n Total Time: 1.00\n\n\n\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000073 2/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 71 of 77 PageID 222\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 1.00\n DRAFT\n Receipt and review of client's edits to draft motion for default\n judgment and default judgment.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 2.00\n Monday, February 16\n Total Time: 2.00\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC 2.00\n Temporary Matter\n DRAFT\n Continued work on Drafts Motion and Judgment.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 3.20\n Friday, February 13\n Total Time: 3.20\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 3.20\n Finalize motion for default judgment and final default judgment DRAFT\n following telephone call with Carolyn Follis to include fraud\n findings and individual liability of owners.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 1.00\n Tuesday, January 13\n Total Time: 1.00\n\n\n\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000074 3/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 72 of 77 PageID 223\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 1.00\n DRAFT\n Meeting with Erick, Casey and ALustigman@olshanlaw.com,\n regarding \"BLD - CSE and Andrew Teams Meeting\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 0.20\n Monday, January 12\n Total Time: 0.20\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 0.20\n DRAFT\n Email from Lustigman, Andrew B., regarding \"RE: Clerk's Entry of\n Default(169384209.1) - Demand for Payment\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 2.00\n Friday, January 9\n Total Time: 2.00\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC 2.00\n Temporary Matter DRAFT\n Continued preparation of motion for default judgment.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 3.00\n Tuesday, January 6\n Total Time: 3.00\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 2.50\n DRAFT\n Finalize motion for default judgment and reply to client regarding\n update on same.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000075 4/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 73 of 77 PageID 224\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 0.50\n DRAFT\n Draft email to defendants informing them of default and demand\n for payment and warn of potential for personal liability.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 3.30\n Thursday, December 4, 2025\n Total Time: 3.30\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 3.30\n DRAFT\n Continued work on motion for default judgment, order and\n required exhibits.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 2.00\n Monday, December 1, 2025\n Total Time: 2.00\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 2.00\n DRAFT\n Sent email to Carolyn Follis, regarding \"You were right....of\n course\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 1.50\n Friday, November 21, 2025\n Total Time: 1.50\n\n\n\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000076 5/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 74 of 77 PageID 225\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 1.00\n Sent email to patrick@syracusespaghetti.com, regarding \"RE: DRAFT\n Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc. v Spaghetti Warehouse\n Restaurant of CNY LLC (Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E)\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 0.30\n Email from patrick@syracusespaghetti.com, regarding \"RE: DRAFT\n Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc. v Spaghetti Warehouse\n Restaurant of CNY LLC (Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E)\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC 0.20\n Temporary Matter\n DRAFT\n Email from Erick, Casey, regarding \"Quick Update\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 0.80\n Tuesday, November 18, 2025\n Total Time: 0.80\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 0.80\n Email from carolyn.follis@lawyer.com, regarding \"Re: My phone DRAFT\n call today\". Take proposed terms from client and relay same to\n opposing counsel.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 0.20\n Monday, November 17, 2025\n Total Time: 0.20\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000077 6/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 75 of 77 PageID 226\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 0.20\n Telephone call with Carolyn Follis regarding conference call with\n DRAFT\n defendants, our current damages, possible negotiations, and our\n response to defendants' request for an extension to file a\n response.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 0.80\n Friday, November 14, 2025\n Total Time: 0.80\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 0.10\n Email from Patrick Dussol, regarding \"Re: Spaghetti Warehouse DRAFT\n Restaurants Inc. v Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC\n (Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E) \".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 0.10\n Email from carolyn.follis@lawyer.com, regarding \"Re: FW: DRAFT\n Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc. v Spaghetti Warehouse\n Restaurant of CNY LLC (Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E)\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000078 7/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 76 of 77 PageID 227\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n Follow up telephone call with Defendants regarding complaint, 0.60\n possible settlement and damages; Email from DRAFT\n carolyn.follis@lawyer.com, regarding \"Re: FW: Spaghetti\n Warehouse Restaurants Inc. v Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant\n of CNY LLC (Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E)\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 0.90\n Thursday, November 13, 2025\n Total Time: 0.90\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 0.70\n DRAFT\n Email from Siegel, Bill, regarding \"RE: Motion to Sub and Des Lead\n Counsel.docx\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 0.20\n Email from Anthony Schlur, regarding \"Spaghetti Warehouse DRAFT\n Restaurants Inc. v Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC\n (Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E)\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 0.20\n Monday, November 10, 2025\n Total Time: 0.20\n\n\n\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000079 8/9\n\f3/13/26, 6:36 PM iTimeKeep\n Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 15 Filed 03/13/26 Page 77 of 77 PageID 228\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter\n 0.20\n DRAFT\n Email from carolyn.follis@lawyer.com, regarding \"Re: SWRI v\n SWCNY 3:25-cv-02727 v\".\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n Unreleased: 2.00\n Tuesday, October 28, 2025\n Total Time: 2.00\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC\n Temporary Matter 1.20\n Receipt and review of notice of successful service on defendant; DRAFT\n calculate response deadline, set temporary restraining\n order/temporary injunction hearing; and inform client of same.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n BLD Ventures vs. SW NYC 0.80\n Temporary Matter DRAFT\n Draft a notice of change of address and serve on all parties.\n\n Action: NA - Not Applicable\n Task:\n Activity:\n Location: TXDA - TX - Dallas\n\n\n\n\nhttps://services.bellefieldcloud.com/newdesktop/#/mytime\n APPENDIX 000080 9/9\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:22:22.659342-07:00","document_number":"15","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018439096","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Appendix in Support","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.609711-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.698193-07:00","date_filed":"2026-03-13","time_filed":null,"entry_number":15,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-03-13.003","pacer_sequence_number":35,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/463108027/","id":463108027,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/478244179/","id":478244179,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/14/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.568770-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T03:43:55.440161-07:00","sha1":"016214fdec1add14a3dd6f3d546d69520552a1bd","page_count":21,"file_size":106754,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.14.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.14.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 1 of 21 PageID 131\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff, \u00a7\n \u00a7\nv. \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC, \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Defendant. \u00a7\n\n PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND\n PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST DEFENDANT SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE\n RESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT\n\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 1\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 2 of 21 PageID 132\n\n\n\n TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 4\nBACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY................................................................... 4\nLEGAL STANDARD FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT ................................................................ 8\nENTITLEMENT TO JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION .................................. 9\nLIABILITY ON WELL-PLEADED ALLEGATIONS.............................................................. 10\nCOUNT I \u2013 LANHAM ACT - TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT .......................................... 11\nCOUNT II \u2013 LANHAM ACT - UNFAIR COMPETITION ...................................................... 12\nCOUNT III\u2013 BREACH OF CONTRACT ................................................................................. 13\nCOUNT IV \u2013 COMMON-LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT, COMMON-LAW AND\nSTATUTORY UNFAIR COMPETITION ................................................................................. 14\nCOUNT V \u2013 TRADEMARK DILUTION AND INJURY TO BUSINESS REPUTATION .... 15\nSPECIFIC DAMAGES ............................................................................................................... 15\nPRAYER FOR RELIEF ............................................................................................................. 18\nCONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 20\nCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ................................................................................................... 21\n\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 2\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 3 of 21 PageID 133\n\n\n\n TABLE OF AUTHORITIES\n\n Page(s)\n\nState Cases\n\nEisenhour v. Stafford,\n No. 9:12-CV-62, 2013 WL 6212725 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 26, 2013) ........................................... 10\nLindsey v. Prive Corp.,\n 161 F.3d 886 (5th Cir. 1998) ..................................................................................................... 9\nNishimatsu Const. Co., Ltd. v. Houston Nat. Bank,\n 515 F.2d 1200 (5th Cir. 1975) ............................................................................................. 9, 10\nU.S. For Use of M-CO Const., Inc. v. Shipco Gen., Inc.,\n 814 F.2d 1011, nc., (5th Cir. 1987) ......................................................................................... 10\n\n\nFederal Statutes\n\n15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1114(l) ..................................................................................................................... 11\n15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1117 ................................................................................................................... 18, 19\n15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1118 ......................................................................................................................... 18\n15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1121(a) ...................................................................................................................... 5\n15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1125(a) .................................................................................................................... 12\n28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1331, 1332(a)(1), 1338(a)-(b) ................................................................................... 5\n28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1367(a) ...................................................................................................................... 5\n28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1391 ........................................................................................................................... 5\n50 U.S.C. \u00a7 3931 ........................................................................................................................... 9\nTex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. \u00a7 16.103 (West) .......................................................................... 15\n\n\nRules\n\nFed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i) ....................................................................................................... 8\nFed. R. Civ. P. 4 ........................................................................................................................ 4, 8\nFed. R. Civ. P. 55(b) ....................................................................................................... 4, 8, 9, 10\nFed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(6)................................................................................................................. 10\n\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 3\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 4 of 21 PageID 134\n\n\n\nTO THE HONORABLE COURT:\n\n Plaintiff, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc. (\"Spaghetti Warehouse\" or \"Plaintiff\"),\n\nseeks a default judgment against Defendant, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n\n(\"Defendant\"), under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b) because Defendant has failed to plead or otherwise\n\ndefend in this action, despite being properly served Plaintiff's Complaint for Preliminary and\n\nPermanent Injunctive Relief, Damages, and Other Relief (Doc. 1, filed on October 7, 2025, and\n\nserved on October 27, 2025, in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (Doc. 8, filed on November 12,\n\n2025). On December 5, 2025, the Clerk of the Court entered a default against Defendant. (Doc.\n\n12).\n\n INTRODUCTION\n\n 1. Plaintiff filed this action asserting claims for trademark infringement under the\n\nLanham Act and Texas law, unfair competition, dilution, and breach of contract based on\n\nDefendant's post-termination use of Plaintiff's licensed intellectual property and failure to\n\nperform obligations under a written License Agreement. Defendant was provided with written\n\nnotice of default and later written notice of termination of the License Agreement and cease and\n\ndesist but failed to cure. Defendant received notice of this Courts Default notice. Defendant\n\ncontinues to use Plaintiff's marks and other licensed property without authorization.\n\n 2. Plaintiff respectfully requests entry of default judgment granting injunctive and\n\nmonetary relief consistent with the Complaint.\n\n BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY\n\n 3. Plaintiff is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business in Dallas,\n\nTexas.\n\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 4\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 5 of 21 PageID 135\n\n\n\n 4. Defendant is a New York limited liability company with its principal place of\n\nbusiness in Rye, New York.\n\n 5. This action arises under the Lanham Act and related statutes; the Court has\n\nsubject-matter jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1121(a), 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1331, 1332(a)(1), 1338(a)-(b),\n\nand supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1367(a).\n\n 6. Venue and personal jurisdiction are proper under 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1391.\n\n 7. On December 11, 2018, the parties entered a License Agreement under which\n\nPlaintiff granted Defendant a non-exclusive license to use Plaintiff's intellectual property and\n\nmarks at the licensed restaurant location. Appx. 20, Section 1.1 of the License, titled \u201cGrant.\u201d\n\n 8. Defendant agreed to pay a license fee equal to one percent (1%) of monthly\n\nrevenues, payable within sixty (60) days following the end of each calendar year, and to pay a\n\n$5,000.00 renewal fee for each renewal term. Appx. 21, Section 1.5 of the License, titled \u201cFee.\u201d\n\n 9. The Agreement provides for termination upon an Event of Default after written\n\nnotice and a failure to cure, with all rights to the marks ceasing upon termination, and for\n\nprevailing-party recovery of attorneys' fees. Appx. 22, Section 5.3.1 to 5.3.5 of the License, titled\n\n\u201cTermination.\u201d\n\n 10. Defendant has breached the Agreement by failing to pay the required fees for\n\n2023, 2024, and 2025.\n\n 11. Plaintiff issued a written Notice of Default regarding Defendant's failure to pay\n\nthe 2023 License Fee on October 7, 2024. Appx. 27.\n\n 12. Defendant failed to cure. On June 23, 2025, Plaintiff issued a written Notice of\n\nTermination of the License Agreement and demanded that Defendant cease all use of Plaintiff's\n\nmarks and other licensed property. Appx. 28 \u2013 33.\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 5\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 6 of 21 PageID 136\n\n\n\n 13. Following termination, Defendant had no rights to continue using \"Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse\" or the www.meatballs.com domain as well as Plaintiff's licensed property and marks\n\nin connection with its restaurant, causing confusion and irreparable harm to Plaintiff's goodwill.\n\nAppx. 43 \u2013 48.\n\n 14. Defendant has failed to pay License Fees for calendar years 2023, 2024, and the\n\nperiod January 1, 2025, through June 23, 2025 (the date of termination). The License Agreement\n\nrequires Defendant to pay a license fee equal to one percent (1%) of monthly revenues. Based on\n\nDefendant's revenue history and operations during this period, the unpaid license fees are\n\nestimated at $45,000. Id.\n\n 15. Defendant has also failed to pay annual license renewal fees of $5,000 per year\n\nfor 2023, 2024, and 2025, totaling $15,000 in unpaid renewal fees. Id.\n\n 16. After the termination of the License Agreement on June 23, 2025, Defendant\n\ncontinued unauthorized use of Plaintiff's trademarks, intellectual property, and licensed materials\n\nduring November and December 2025, causing additional damages to Plaintiff estimated at\n\n$10,000. Id.; Appx. 49 \u2013 60.\n\n 17. After the termination of the License, Defendant issued gift cards bearing Plaintiff's\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse marks and branding, failed to honor those gift cards, and directed customers\n\nto contact Plaintiff for refunds. Plaintiff was forced to inform these customers that it did not own\n\nor operate Defendant's location and that only Defendant was responsible for refunds. This\n\nconduct fraudulently misrepresented the relationship between Plaintiff and Defendant, resulting\n\nin a financial gain to Defendant and intentionally damaging Plaintiff's brand and reputation.\n\nAppx. 43 \u2013 48.\n\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 6\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 7 of 21 PageID 137\n\n\n\n 18. Defendant issued a public press release, using Plaintiff's trademark, to promote\n\nthe restaurant during the seasonally high revenue periods and announcing its closure after a final\n\nNew Year's Eve, intending to capitalize on the goodwill and loyalty of Plaintiff's brand.\n\nDefendant continues operating at the same location under a new business name, Click Stream\n\nStudios (a digital content marketing company), and markets its new business while continuing to\n\nuse Plaintiff's trademarks and goodwill. Defendant blatantly used Plaintiff's trademarks, knowing\n\nthey were in violation of the License Agreement, to extract profits for itself. Appx. 49 \u2013 60.\n\n 19. Defendant only relinquished use of the license related to the restaurant after\n\nexhausting its value for Defendant's own commercial benefit, despite having actual knowledge\n\nof its obligations under the License Agreement and applicable trademark law. Defendant\n\ncontinues to promote its new business by using the Spaghetti Warehouse goodwill and loyalty of\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s Brand. Appx. 43 \u2013 48.\n\n 20. The owners and operators of Defendant's restaurant are attorneys, Anthony Schlur\n\nand Patrick Dussol, who knew or should have known they were violating the License Agreement\n\nand trademark law through their continued unauthorized use of Plaintiff's intellectual property.\n\n 21. Defendant is required to provide Plaintiff with a sworn accounting and attestation\n\nas to the accuracy of revenue reported in its financial statements for calendar years 2023, 2024,\n\nand 2025 to permit calculation of the precise license fees owed under the License Agreement.\n\nAppx. 20 -26.\n\n 22. To the extent the renewal fees and license fees calculated based on Defendant's\n\nsworn financial statements exceed the amounts estimated herein, Defendant shall pay the\n\ndifference. To the extent any overpayment is shown, no adjustment or credit shall be made due\n\nto Defendant's failure to timely pay as required by the License Agreement and Defendant's\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 7\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 8 of 21 PageID 138\n\n\n\nintentional unauthorized use of Plaintiff's trademarks and intellectual property following\n\ntermination of the License Agreement.\n\n 23. Plaintiff has complied with its own obligations under the License Agreement.\n\n 24. On October 7, 2025, Plaintiff filed its Complaint for Permanent and Injunctive\n\nRelief, Damages, and Other Relief. (Doc. 1) Appx. 1 \u2013 16.\n\n 25. On October 8, 2025, the Court issued a Summons as to Defendant, Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC. (Doc. 6).\n\n 26. On October 27, 2025, in accordance with the Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, Defendant was\n\nserved, and the Return of Service was filed on November 12, 2025. (Doc. 8).\n\n 27. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i), Defendant was required to file an\n\nanswer or other responsive pleading within 21 days after being served. Because service was\n\naffected on October 27, 2025, Defendant's answer or other responsive pleading was due on or\n\nbefore November 17, 2025.\n\n 28. On December 5, 2025, the Clerk of the Court entered a default against Defendant.\n\n(Doc. 12).\n\n 29. To date, Defendant has failed to file an answer or other responsive pleading within\n\nthe time required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i).\n\n LEGAL STANDARD FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT\n\n 30. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b) provides for the entry of default judgment when a party\n\nagainst whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend.\n\nUpon entry of default, the well-pleaded factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating\n\nto the amount of damages, are taken as true.\n\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 8\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 9 of 21 PageID 139\n\n\n\n 31. Upon default, the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint except those relating\n\nto damages are deemed admitted. Nishimatsu Const. Co., Ltd. v. Houston Nat. Bank, 515 F.2d\n\n1200 (5th Cir. 1975).\n\n 32. The decision to enter a default judgment lies within the district court's discretion,\n\nguided by whether (1) the default was willful; (2) the plaintiff would suffer prejudice absent\n\njudgment; and (3) the defendant has no meritorious defense. Lindsey v. Prive Corp., 161 F.3d\n\n886, 893 (5th Cir. 1998).\n\n 33. Defendant is not a minor or an incompetent person. A declaration attesting that\n\nDefendant is not currently in military service pursuant to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act\n\n(\"SCRA\"), 50 U.S.C. \u00a7 3931, is attached hereto.\n\n ENTITLEMENT TO JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION\n\n 34. Plaintiff moves this court for entry of a default judgment and permanent injunction\n\nagainst Defendant under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b). Plaintiff requests that the judgment be entered as\n\nfurther set forth in the attached proposed default judgment.\n\n 35. Defendant has not appeared in this action and is not entitled to notice of this\n\napplication for entry of a default judgment.\n\n 36. Defendant's failure to respond warrants entry of default judgment for Plaintiff.\n\n 37. Plaintiff's claims are supported by the well-pleaded allegations in the Complaint,\n\nwhich are deemed admitted upon default.\n\n 38. Plaintiff is prejudiced by Defendant's refusal to participate in the litigation, as\n\nPlaintiff is unable to obtain relief absent a judgment.\n\n 39. There is no indication that Defendant possesses any meritorious defenses.\n\n\n\n\n173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\nPAGE 9\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 10 of 21 PageID 140\n\n\n\n 40. Accordingly, a default judgment is warranted. See U.S. For Use of M-CO Const.,\n\n Inc. v. Shipco Gen., Inc., 814 F.2d 1011, nc., (5th Cir. 1987) (default judgment appropriate where\n\n defendant fails to defend and plaintiff's claims are supported).\n\n LIABILITY ON WELL-PLEADED ALLEGATIONS\n\n 41. Upon the entry of default, all well-pleaded factual allegations of the complaint,\n\n except those relating to the amount of damages, are taken as true. Plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. 1]\n\n alleges facts sufficient to establish Defendant's liability on Plaintiff\u2019s causes of action.\n\n 42. The Court may render default judgment against a party who has not timely filed a\n\n responsive pleading or otherwise defended the suit. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). The Court should\n\n enter a default judgment against Defendant because it has failed to timely answer or otherwise\n\n defend himself in this case. Moreover, Defendant is not an infant, incompetent person, or a\n\n military service member. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2); 50 U.S.C. \u00a7 3931(b)(1)(A).\n\n 43. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55, entry of default is a two-step process: (1) the entry of\n\n default and (2) the subsequent entry of a default judgment. Eisenhour v. Stafford, No. 9:12-CV-\n\n 62, 2013 WL 6212725, at *1 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 26, 2013)(internal citations omitted). After the\n\n Clerk enters default, the plaintiff must apply to the court for a default judgment where the amount\n\n of damages is not certain. Id. *5.\n\n 44. \u201cAn allegation \u2013 other than one relating to the amount of damages \u2013 is admitted if\n\n a responsive pleading is required and the allegation is not denied.\u201d Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(6); See\n\n also Nishimatsu Const. Co., Ltd., 515 F.2d at 1206(\u201cThe defendant, by his default, admits the\n\n plaintiff\u2019s well-pleaded allegations of fact\u2026\u201d). Accordingly, by default, Defendant admits the\n\n allegations in Plaintiff\u2019s Complaint. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all of its factual allegations set\n\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 10\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 11 of 21 PageID 141\n\n\n\n forth in its Complaint, and seeks judgment by default on its claims against Defendant as set forth\n\n below.\n\n 45. By its default, Defendant has admitted to the facts underlying the following\n\n claims:\n\n COUNT I \u2013 LANHAM ACT - TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT\n\n 46. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs of its Motion for Default\n\n Judgment as if fully set forth herein.\n\n 47. Defendant's acts, practices, and conduct constitute an infringing use in interstate\n\n commerce of a reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of the Marks, and\n\n Defendant's sale, offering for sale, distribution or advertising of goods and services under the\n\n Marks, or any designs similar thereto, is likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive the\n\n public in violation of 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1114(l).\n\n 48. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's infringement, Plaintiff has been\n\n and is likely to be substantially injured in its business, including its goodwill and reputation,\n\n resulting in lost revenues and profits and diminished goodwill.\n\n 49. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law because the Marks are unique and\n\n represent to the public Plaintiff's identity, reputation, and goodwill, such that damages alone\n\n cannot fully compensate for Defendant's misconduct.\n\n 50. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendant and those acting in concert with them\n\n will continue to use and infringe the Marks, to Plaintiff's irreparable injury.\n\n 51. This threat of future injury to Plaintiff's business identity, goodwill, and reputation\n\n requires injunctive relief to prevent Defendant's continued use of the Marks, and to ameliorate\n\n and mitigate Plaintiff's injuries.\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 11\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 12 of 21 PageID 142\n\n\n\n COUNT II \u2013 LANHAM ACT - UNFAIR COMPETITION\n\n 52. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs of its Motion for Default\n\n Judgment as if fully set forth herein.\n\n 53. Defendant's acts, practices, and conduct constitute unfair competition, false\n\n designation of origin, and false or misleading descriptions or representations of fact, in that they\n\n are likely to cause confusion or to cause mistake, to deceive others as to the affiliation,\n\n connection, or association of the parties, and/or to misrepresent the nature, characteristics,\n\n qualities, or geographic origin of the parties' goods, services and commercial activities, all in\n\n violation of 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1125(a).\n\n 54. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unfair competition, Plaintiff has\n\n been and is likely to be substantially injured in its business, including its goodwill and reputation,\n\n resulting in lost revenues and profits and diminished goodwill.\n\n 55. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law because the Marks are unique and\n\n represent to the public Plaintiff's identity, reputation, and goodwill, such that damages alone\n\n cannot fully compensate Plaintiff for Defendant's misconduct.\n\n 56. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendant and those acting in concert with them\n\n will continue to compete unfairly with Plaintiff, to Plaintiff's irreparable injury. This threat of\n\n future injury to Plaintiff's business identity, goodwill, and reputation requires injunctive relief to\n\n prevent Defendant's continued unfair competition and to ameliorate and mitigate Plaintiff's\n\n injuries.\n\n 57. Defendant\u2019s use of Plaintiffs Marks in commerce after Termination was not a\n\n random or accidental use. Defendants' press releases document Defendant\u2019s intentional use of\n\n Plaintiff's Trademark in the marketplace.\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 12\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 13 of 21 PageID 143\n\n\n\n COUNT III\u2013 BREACH OF CONTRACT\n\n 58. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs of its Motion for Default\n\n Judgment as if fully set forth herein.\n\n 59. Defendant has failed and refused to perform its obligations under the License\n\n Agreement, including its obligations (i) to pay all amounts owed to Spaghetti Warehouse, (ii) to\n\n cease using the Licensed Property (iii) to surrender to Spaghetti Warehouse all materials bearing\n\n any of the Marks, and (iv) to discontinue all use of Spaghetti Warehouse's confidential and\n\n proprietary information.\n\n 60. Unless and until Defendant is ordered to perform its post-termination obligations\n\n under the License Agreement, Plaintiff is likely to be substantially injured in its business,\n\n including its goodwill and reputation, resulting in lost revenues and profits and diminished\n\n goodwill, for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.\n\n 61. This threat of future injury to Plaintiff's business identity, goodwill, and reputation\n\n requires that Defendant be ordered to perform its contractual post-termination obligations under\n\n the License Agreement to prevent Defendant's continued breach and to ameliorate and mitigate\n\n Plaintiff's injuries.\n\n 62. In addition to the injuries inflicted to Plaintiff's business identity, goodwill, and\n\n reputation, Plaintiff continues to be damaged in an amount equal to all outstanding monies owed\n\n under the License Agreement.\n\n 63. Also, the License Agreement provides that in the event of any default on the part\n\n of either party, the party in default will pay the prevailing party, among other things, all\n\n reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the prevailing party in any legal action or other proceeding\n\n as a result of such default.\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 13\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 14 of 21 PageID 144\n\n\n\n 64. Defendant breached and failed to perform in accordance with the License and\n\n other agreements, and said breach has caused Plaintiff to incur damages, including but not limited\n\n to attorneys' fees.\n\n COUNT IV \u2013 COMMON-LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT, COMMON-LAW\n AND STATUTORY UNFAIR COMPETITION\n\n 65. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs of its Motion for Default\n\n Judgment as if fully set forth herein.\n\n 66. As a result of the public's association of the Spaghetti Warehouse marks with\n\n Plaintiff, Defendant's use and sale of deceptively similar products in connection with its\n\n restaurant is likely to cause confusion, mistake, and to deceive.\n\n 67. Defendant has continued using Plaintiff's Marks with full prior knowledge of\n\n Plaintiff's rights to them and of the reputation of the Spaghetti Warehouse trademarks.\n\n 68. Defendant's sale and use of the Marks were for the willful and calculated purpose\n\n of trading on Plaintiff's goodwill; further, Defendant have willfully promoted the restaurants in\n\n such a manner so as inevitably to suggest an association, affiliation, or sponsorship with, or\n\n approval by, Plaintiff and to cause, or be likely to cause, confusion, or mistake among purchasers\n\n as to the origin of Defendant's products, all to Defendant's gain and Plaintiff's damage.\n\n 69. The conduct of Defendant violates and constitutes an infringement of Plaintiff's\n\n common-law rights in the Marks and constitutes improper and unfair competition with Plaintiff\n\n under the laws of the State of Texas.\n\n 70. Defendant's conduct has damaged and will continue to damage Plaintiff's goodwill\n\n and reputation and will further cause irreparable injury unless restrained by this Court.\n\n 71. To stop Defendant\u2019s continued unauthorized use of the Marks, Plaintiff has no\n\n adequate remedy at law.\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 14\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 15 of 21 PageID 145\n\n\n\n COUNT V \u2013 TRADEMARK DILUTION AND INJURY TO BUSINESS REPUTATION\n\n 72. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs of its Motion for Default\n\n Judgment as if fully set forth herein.\n\n 73. Defendant's conduct will cause a likelihood of dilution of the distinctive and\n\n valuable quality of Plaintiff's trademarks and a likelihood of injury to Plaintiff's business\n\n reputation in violation of the laws of the State of Texas, particularly Tex. Bus. & Com. Code\n\n Ann. \u00a7 16.103 (West), unless enjoined by this Court.\n\n 74. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.\n\n SPECIFIC DAMAGES\n\n 75. Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney's fees. In any civil action under\n\n this title, the court in its discretion may allow the recovery of full costs by or against any party\n\n other than the United States or an officer thereof. Except as otherwise provided by this title, the\n\n court may also award a reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party as part of the costs. 17\n\n U.S.C.A. \u00a7 505.\n\n 76. Recovery for violation of rights (Lanham Act). (a) Profits; damages and costs;\n\n attorney fees. When a violation of any right of the registrant of a mark registered in the Patent\n\n and Trademark Office, a violation under section 1125(a) or (d) of this title, or a willful violation\n\n under section 1125(c) of this title, shall have been established in any civil action arising under\n\n this chapter, the plaintiff shall be entitled, subject to the provisions of sections 1111 and 1114 of\n\n this title, and subject to the principles of equity, to recover (1) defendant's profits, (2) any damages\n\n sustained by the plaintiff, and (3) the costs of the action.\n\n 77. The court shall assess such profits and damages or cause the same to be assessed\n\n under its direction. In assessing profits the plaintiff shall be required to prove defendant's sales\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 15\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 16 of 21 PageID 146\n\n\n\n only; defendant must prove all elements of cost or deduction claimed. In assessing damages the\n\n court may enter judgment, according to the circumstances of the case, for any sum above the\n\n amount found as actual damages, not exceeding three times such amount. If the court shall find\n\n that the amount of the recovery based on profits is either inadequate or excessive the court may\n\n in its discretion enter judgment for such sum as the court shall find to be just, according to the\n\n circumstances of the case. Such sum in either of the above circumstances shall constitute\n\n compensation and not a penalty. The court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney\n\n fees to the prevailing party.\n\n 78. (b) Treble damages for use of counterfeit mark. In assessing damages under\n\n subsection (a) for any violation of section 1114(1)(a) of this title or section 220506 of Title 36,\n\n in a case involving use of a counterfeit mark or designation (as defined in section 1116(d) of this\n\n title), the court shall, unless the court finds extenuating circumstances, enter judgment for three\n\n times such profits or damages, whichever amount is greater, together with a reasonable attorney's\n\n fee, if the violation consists of--(1) intentionally using a mark or designation, knowing such mark\n\n or designation is a counterfeit mark (as defined in section 1116(d) of this title), in connection\n\n with the sale, offering for sale, or distribution of goods or services; or (2) providing goods or\n\n services necessary to the commission of a violation specified in paragraph (1), with the intent\n\n that the recipient of the goods or services would put the goods or services to use in committing\n\n the violation.\n\n 79. In such a case, the court may award prejudgment interest on such amount at an\n\n annual interest rate established under section 6621(a)(2) of Title 26, beginning on the date of the\n\n service of the claimant's pleadings setting forth the claim for such entry of judgment and ending\n\n on the date such entry is made, or for such shorter time as the court considers appropriate.\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 16\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 17 of 21 PageID 147\n\n\n\n 80. (c) Statutory damages for use of counterfeit marks. In a case involving the use of\n\n a counterfeit mark (as defined in section 1116(d) of this title) in connection with the sale, offering\n\n for sale, or distribution of goods or services, the plaintiff may elect, at any time before final\n\n judgment is rendered by the trial court, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits under\n\n subsection (a), an award of statutory damages for any such use in connection with the sale,\n\n offering for sale, or distribution of goods or services in the amount of--(1) not less than $1,000\n\n or more than $200,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services sold, offered for sale,\n\n or distributed, as the court considers just; or (2) if the court finds that the use of the counterfeit\n\n mark was willful, not more than $2,000,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services\n\n sold, offered for sale, or distributed, as the court considers just.\n\n 81. (d) Statutory damages for violation of section 1125(d)(1). In a case involving a\n\n violation of section 1125(d)(1) of this title, the plaintiff may elect, at any time before final\n\n judgment is rendered by the trial court, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award\n\n of statutory damages in the amount of not less than $1,000 and not more than $100,000 per\n\n domain name, as the court considers just.\n\n 82. (e) Rebuttable presumption of willful violation. In the case of a violation\n\n referred to in this section, it shall be a rebuttable presumption that the violation is willful for\n\n purposes of determining relief if the violator, or a person acting in concert with the violator,\n\n knowingly provided or knowingly caused to be provided materially false contact information to\n\n a domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration authority in\n\n registering, maintaining, or renewing a domain name used in connection with the violation.\n\n Nothing in this subsection limits what may be considered a willful violation under this section.\n\n 15 U.S.C.A. \u00a7 1117.\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 17\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 18 of 21 PageID 148\n\n\n\n PRAYER FOR RELIEF\n\n WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for the following relief against Defendant:\n\n 1. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its agents, servants,\n and employees, and those people in active concert or participation with them, from:\n\n a. Using the Marks or any trademark, service mark, logo, or trade name that is\n confusingly similar to the Marks.\n\n b. Otherwise infringing on the Marks or using any similar designation, alone or in\n combination with any other components.\n\n c. Passing off any of its products or services like those of Spaghetti Warehouse or\n its authorized licensee.\n\n d. Causing a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to the source or\n sponsorship of its businesses, products, or services.\n\n e. Causing a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to its affiliation,\n connection, or association with Spaghetti Warehouse and its franchisees or any of\n Spaghetti Warehouse's products or services.\n\n f. Unfairly competing with Spaghetti Warehouse or its affiliates in any manner.\n\n 2. An order pursuant to 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1118 that all labels, signs, prints, packages,\n wrappers, receptacles, uniforms, logo items, and advertisements in possession of Defendant, its\n affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, agents, servants and employees, and those people in active\n concert or participation with them bearing the Marks, and all plates, molds, and other means of\n making the same, if any, be delivered to Spaghetti Warehouse at Defendant's cost;\n\n 3. An order that Defendant be required to promptly eliminate its advertising under\n the Marks or any other confusingly similar designations from all media, including, but not limited\n to, websites, emails, newspapers, flyers, coupons, promotions, signs, menus, telephone books,\n telephone directory assistance listings, and mass mailings, all at Defendant's cost.\n\n 4. An order that Defendant be required to file with the Court and to serve upon\n Plaintiff's counsel within ten (10) days after entry of any injunction or order issued herein, a\n written report, under oath, setting forth in detail the manner in which they have complied with\n such injunction or order.\n\n 5. An order that Defendant account and pay over to Plaintiff all gains, profits, and\n advantages derived by them as a result of its infringement of the Marks, breach of contract, and\n unfair competition to the full extent provided for by Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. \u00a7\n 1117, and by the controlling principles of common law.\n\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 18\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 19 of 21 PageID 149\n\n\n\n 6. An order that Defendant pay to Plaintiffs such damages as Plaintiffs have\n sustained by reason of said trademark infringement, breach of contract, business dilution, and\n unfair competition and that, because of the willful nature of the said infringement, the Court enter\n judgment for Plaintiff for three times the amount of said damages, pursuant to Section 35 of the\n Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1117;\n\n 7. An award of damages as follows:\n\n a. All back license fees owed for calendar years 2023, 2024, and the period January\n 1, 2025, through June 23, 2025 (date of termination), calculated as one percent\n (1%) of Defendant's revenues for said periods, estimated at $45,000.00, subject to\n adjustment based on Defendant's sworn accounting.\n\n b. All back license renewal fees of $5,000 per year for 2023, 2024, and 2025, totaling\n $15,000.\n\n c. All Defendant\u2019s gains from the deliberate continued use of Plaintiff\u2019s Marks from\n and after June 23, 2025, Defendant\u2019s receipt of Termination and Cease and Desist.\n\n d. Disgorgement to Plaintiff of Defendants ill-gotten gains from the deliberate and\n intentional plan of unauthorized use of Plaintiff's trademarks and licensed\n property during November through January 1, 2026, estimated at $250,000.00.\n\n 8. An order for the full and accurate accounting of the sale of Gift Cards bearing the\n Mark or its name.\n\n 9. Disgorgement to Plaintiff of all funds received by Defendant from Defendant\u2019s\n sale of Gift Cards bearing the Marks name. Estimated to be\n\n 10. An order requiring Defendant to provide sworn accounting and attestation as to\n the accuracy of Defendant's financial statements for calendar years 2023, 2024, and 2025,\n including all revenue figures used to calculate license fees owed under the License Agreement.\n\n 11. An order providing that if the license fees and renewal fees calculated based on\n Defendant's sworn financial statements exceed the estimated amounts set forth above, Defendant\n shall pay the difference to Plaintiff.\n\n 12. An order providing that if the license fees calculated based on Defendant's sworn\n financial statements result in any overpayment by Defendant, no credit or adjustment shall be\n made due to Defendant's failure to timely pay amounts owed under the License Agreement and\n Defendant's intentional unauthorized use of Plaintiff's trademarks and intellectual property\n following termination of the License Agreement.\n\n 13. All reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred by Plaintiff in connection with\n this action as provided for by the License Agreement and applicable law.\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 19\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 20 of 21 PageID 150\n\n\n\n 14. All court costs incurred by Plaintiff in this action.\n\n 15. An Order requiring Defendant to immediately perform its contractual post-\n termination obligations under the License Agreement, including, without limitation, its\n obligations.\n\n 16. An Order to take any and all necessary steps to cancel and/or transfer to Spaghetti\n Warehouse any telephone numbers associated with Spaghetti Warehouse or the Marks used in\n connection with the operation of Defendant's former Spaghetti Warehouse restaurants.\n\n 17. An Order to return to Spaghetti Warehouse all operating manuals and other\n materials provided to Defendant in connection with the operation of its former Spaghetti\n Warehouse restaurants, and all materials bearing any of the Marks.\n\n 18. An award of the costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred\n by Plaintiff in connection with this action as provided for by statute and the parties' License\n Agreement, and\n\n 19. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\n CONCLUSION\n\n WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court\n grant this Motion for Default Judgment and enter judgment against Defendant for the relief\n requested herein, including economic and compensatory damages in the amount set forth herein,\n subject to adjustment based on Defendant's sworn accounting, pre-judgment and post-judgment\n interest, costs of court, a hearing to determine the amount of exemplary damages, and such other\n and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.\n\n DATED March 13, 2026.\n\n LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP\n\n\n By:_____________________________\n CASEY S. ERICK\n TX State Bar No. 24028564\n Kyndall E. Richardson\n TX State Bar No. 24149343\n 2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2000\n Dallas, Texas 75201\n Telephone: (214) 722-7107\n Fax: (214) 722-7111\n Casey.Erick@lewisbrisbois.com\n Kyndall.Richardson@lewisbrisbois.com\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 20\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 14 Filed 03/13/26 Page 21 of 21 PageID 151\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n The undersigned does hereby certify that on the 13th day of March 2026, the foregoing\n document was served electronically with a copy of the pleading through use of the Court's\n CM/ECF system and/or mailing it to the last known address of counsel and or parties, if any.\n\n\n _____________________________\n CASEY S. ERICK\n\n\n\n\n 173428459.1 171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT \u2013\n PAGE 21\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:21:53.472634-07:00","document_number":"14","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018439093","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.532662-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.656073-07:00","date_filed":"2026-03-13","time_filed":null,"entry_number":14,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-03-13.002","pacer_sequence_number":32,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/463108025/","id":463108025,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/478244177/","id":478244177,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/13/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.458138-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T03:43:55.391120-07:00","sha1":"3dd7b64f7c2f66500c0ed863cb68354bd47e11c4","page_count":4,"file_size":57077,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.13.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.13.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13 Filed 03/13/26 Page 1 of 4 PageID 121\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff, \u00a7\n \u00a7\nv. \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC, \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Defendant. \u00a7\n\n PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT\n\nTO THE HONORABLE COURT:\n\n Plaintiff, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc. (\"Spaghetti Warehouse\" or \"Plaintiff\"),\n\nseeks a default judgment against Defendant, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n\n(\"Defendant\"), under Rule 55(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because Defendant has\n\nfailed to plead or otherwise defend in this action, despite being properly served Plaintiff's\n\nComplaint for Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief, Damages, and Other Relief (Doc. 1,\n\nfiled on October 7, 2025, and served on October 27, 2025, in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4\n\n(Doc. 8, filed on November 12, 2025). On December 5, 2025, the Clerk of the Court entered a\n\ndefault against Defendant.\n\n INTRODUCTION\n\n 1. Plaintiff filed this action asserting claims for trademark infringement under the\n\nLanham Act and Texas law, unfair competition, dilution, and breach of contract based on\n\nDefendant's post-termination use of Plaintiff's licensed intellectual property and failure to\n\nperform obligations under a written License Agreement. Defendant was provided with written\n\n\n\n\n171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 1\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13 Filed 03/13/26 Page 2 of 4 PageID 122\n\n\n\nnotice of default and later written notice of termination of the License Agreement and cease and\n\ndesist but failed to cure. Defendant received notice of this Courts Default notice. Defendant\n\ncontinues to use Plaintiff's marks and other licensed property without authorization.\n\n 2. Plaintiff respectfully requests entry of default judgment granting injunctive and\n\nmonetary relief consistent with the Complaint and the accompanying Motion for Default\n\nJudgment and Brief in Support, the Appendix, Exhibits and evidence in support thereof.\n\n LEGAL STANDARD FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT\n\n 3. Rule 55(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for the entry of default\n\njudgment when a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to\n\nplead or otherwise defend. Upon entry of default, the well-pleaded factual allegations of the\n\ncomplaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, are taken as true.\n\n 4. Upon default, the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint except those relating\n\nto damages are deemed admitted. Nishimatsu Constr. Co. v. Hous. Nat'l Bank, 515 F.2d 1200,\n\n1206 (5th Cir. 1975).\n\n 5. The decision to enter a default judgment lies within the district court's discretion,\n\nguided by whether (1) the default was willful; (2) the plaintiff would suffer prejudice absent\n\njudgment; and (3) the defendant has no meritorious defense. Lindsey v. Prive Corp., 161 F.3d\n\n886, 893 (5th Cir. 1998).\n\n 6. Plaintiff moves this court for entry of a default judgment against Defendant under\n\nRule 55(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff requests that the judgment be\n\nentered as further set forth in the attached proposed default judgment.\n\n 7. Defendant has not appeared in this action and is not entitled to notice of this\n\napplication for entry of a default judgment.\n\n\n\n\n171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 2\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13 Filed 03/13/26 Page 3 of 4 PageID 123\n\n\n\n 8. Defendant's failure to respond warrants entry of default judgment for Plaintiff.\n\n 9. Plaintiff's claims are supported by the well-pleaded allegations in the Complaint,\n\nwhich are deemed admitted upon default.\n\n 10. Plaintiff is prejudiced by Defendant's refusal to participate in the litigation, as\n\nPlaintiff is unable to obtain relief absent a judgment.\n\n 11. There is no indication that Defendant possesses any meritorious defenses.\n\n 12. Accordingly, a default judgment is warranted. See United States v. Shipco Gen.,\n\nInc., 814 F.2d 1011, 1014 (5th Cir. 1987) (default judgment appropriate where defendant fails to\n\ndefend and plaintiff's claims are supported).\n\n\n CONCLUSION\n\n WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court\ngrant this Motion for Default Judgment and enter judgment against Defendant for the relief\nrequested herein, including economic and compensatory damages subject to adjustment based on\nDefendant's sworn accounting, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, costs of court, a hearing\nto determine the amount of exemplary damages, and such other and further relief as the Court\nmay deem just and proper.\n\nDATED: March 13, 2026.\n LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP\n\n\n By:___ __________________________\n Casey S. Erick\n TX State Bar No. 24028564\n Kyndall E. Richardson\n TX State Bar No. 24149343\n 2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2000\n Dallas, Texas 75201\n Telephone: (214) 722-7107\n Fax: (214) 722-7111\n Casey.Erick@lewisbrisbois.com\n Kyndall.Richardson@lewisbrisbois.com\n\n\n\n\n171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 3\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13 Filed 03/13/26 Page 4 of 4 PageID 124\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n The undersigned does hereby certify that on the 13th day of March 2026, the foregoing\ndocument was served electronically with a copy of the pleading through use of the Court's\nCM/ECF system and/or mailing it to the last known address of counsel and or parties, if any.\n\n\n _____________________________\n CASEY S. ERICK\n\n\n\n\n171935229.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 4\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:21:26.202224-07:00","document_number":"13","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018439089","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Motion for Default Judgment","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/478245245/","id":478245245,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/13/1/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-05-06T07:21:26.808407-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T08:19:45.084517-07:00","sha1":"712c7abbceb0a8d7ccc6282107a956b39dd8c6e8","page_count":6,"file_size":54659,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.13.1.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.13.1.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13-1 Filed 03/13/26 Page 1 of 6 PageID 125\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff, \u00a7\n \u00a7\nv. \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC, \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Defendant. \u00a7\n\n FINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT\n The Court, having considered Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment and the evidence\n\npresented, enters the following Final Default Judgment:\n\nFindings of Fact and Conclusions of Law\n\nTHE COURT FINDS that:\n 1. Defendant Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC, entered into a License Agreement\n with Plaintiff for the operation of Spaghetti Warehouse restaurants under Plaintiff's trademarks\n and service marks (the \"Marks\").\n 2. Anthony Schlur and Patrick Dussol (the \"Individual Defendants\") are the owners and operators\n of the Defendant entity.\nFindings Regarding Fraud\n\n 3. The Individual Defendants committed fraud by making material misrepresentations and\n omissions to Plaintiff, including:\n a. Failing to provide accurate and complete financial statements for calendar years 2023,\n 2024, and 2025 as required by the License Agreement\n b. Misrepresenting Defendant's ability and intention to pay license fees and renewal fees\n when due\n c. Concealing the Defendant's true financial condition and revenue figures to avoid paying\n the required percentage-based license fees\n\n\n\nFINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 1\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13-1 Filed 03/13/26 Page 2 of 6 PageID 126\n\n\n d. Making false assurances of compliance with the License Agreement while simultaneously\n breaching its material terms\n 4. Plaintiff justifiably relied on the Individual Defendants' representations regarding financial\n performance and compliance with the License Agreement\n 5. The Individual Defendants made these misrepresentations and omissions knowingly, or with\n reckless disregard for the truth, and with the intent to deceive Plaintiff and induce Plaintiff to\n forbear exercising its contractual remedies\n 6. As a direct and proximate result of the Individual Defendants' fraudulent conduct, Plaintiff\n suffered damages including unpaid license fees, unpaid renewal fees, loss of goodwill,\n trademark infringement damages, and costs of enforcement\n 7. The Individual Defendants continued to use the Marks after termination of the License\n Agreement on June 23, 2025, with full knowledge that such use was unauthorized, further\n demonstrating their fraudulent intent\nFindings Regarding Veil-Piercing and Joint and Several Liability\n\n 1. Anthony Schlur and Patrick Dussol exercised complete dominion and control over Defendant\n entity\n 2. The Individual Defendants used the corporate form of Defendant to perpetrate actual fraud\n upon Plaintiff by:\n a. Operating Defendant as their alter ego without observing corporate formalities\n b. Commingling corporate and personal interests\n c. Using the corporate entity as a sham to avoid personal liability for their fraudulent conduct\n d. Undercapitalizing the Defendant while extracting revenues that should have been paid to\n Plaintiff as license fees\n 3. The corporate form was used by the Individual Defendants to perpetrate fraud and defeat\n public convenience, specifically to avoid paying contractually obligated fees to Plaintiff while\n continuing to benefit from use of Plaintiff's valuable intellectual property\n 4. Allowing the Individual Defendants to shield themselves behind the corporate veil would\n promote injustice and defeat the equities of this case\n 5. The factors supporting piercing the corporate veil are present, and traditional corporate law\n principles require holding Anthony Schlur and Patrick Dussol personally liable for the debts\n and obligations of Defendant entity\n\n\nFINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 2\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13-1 Filed 03/13/26 Page 3 of 6 PageID 127\n\n\n 6. Anthony Schlur and Patrick Dussol are jointly and severally liable with Defendant for all\n damages, fees, obligations, and relief set forth in this Judgment\n 7. The Individual Defendants' conduct was willful, intentional, malicious, and in bad faith,\n justifying the imposition of enhanced damages and exemplary relief\nInjunctive Relief\n\n IT IS ORDERED that Defendant, Anthony Schlur, Patrick Dussol, their agents, servants,\n\nemployees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, are hereby permanently\n\nenjoined from:\n\n 1. Using the Marks or any trademark, service mark, logo, or trade name that is confusingly\n similar to the Marks\n 2. Infringing on the Marks or using any similar designation, alone or in combination with other\n components\n 3. Passing off any products or services such as those of Spaghetti Warehouse or its authorized\n licensees\n 4. Causing likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to the source or sponsorship of their\n businesses, products, or services\n 5. Causing likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to their affiliation, connection, or\n association with Spaghetti Warehouse, its franchisees, or any of Spaghetti Warehouse's\n products or services\n 6. Unfairly competing with Spaghetti Warehouse or its affiliates in any manner\nSurrender and Elimination of Infringing Materials\n\n IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1118 that:\n\n 1. Within thirty (30) days of this Order, Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol shall\n deliver to Plaintiff, at their cost, all labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles,\n uniforms, logo items, advertisements, plates, molds, and other means of reproduction in their\n possession or control, or in the possession or control of their affiliates, subsidiaries, officers,\n agents, servants, employees, and those in active concert with them, that bear the Marks\n 2. Within thirty (30) days of this Order, Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol shall\n eliminate all advertising under the Marks or any confusingly similar designations from all\n media, including but not limited to websites, social media accounts, emails, newspapers,\n\nFINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 3\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13-1 Filed 03/13/26 Page 4 of 6 PageID 128\n\n\n flyers, coupons, promotions, signs, menus, telephone books, directory assistance listings, and\n mass mailings, all at their cost\nPost-Termination Contractual Obligations\n\n IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol shall\n\nimmediately:\n\n 1. Take all necessary steps to cancel and/or transfer to Plaintiff any telephone numbers, domain\n names, social media accounts, email addresses, and other contact information associated with\n Spaghetti Warehouse or the Marks used in connection with the operation of Defendant's\n former Spaghetti Warehouse restaurants\n 2. Return to Plaintiff all operating manuals, recipes, training materials, proprietary business\n information, and other materials provided to Defendant in connection with the operation of its\n former Spaghetti Warehouse restaurants, and all materials bearing any of the Marks\nFinancial Accounting and Damages\n\n IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:\n\n 1. Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol shall provide to Plaintiff, within thirty (30)\n days of this Order, complete and accurate financial statements for calendar years 2023, 2024,\n and 2025 (through June 23, 2025), including all revenue records, profit and loss statements,\n tax returns, bank statements, and sales records, all attested to under oath as to their\n completeness and accuracy\n 2. Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol, jointly and severally, shall account for and\n pay over to Plaintiff all gains, profits, and advantages derived by them as a result of their\n infringement of the Marks, breach of contract, fraud, and unfair competition, to the full extent\n provided by Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1117, and controlling principles of\n common law\n IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is awarded judgment against Defendant,\n\nAnthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol, jointly and severally, in the following amounts:\n\n 1. Past-Due License Fees: Unpaid license fees for calendar years 2023, 2024, and 2025 (through\n June 23, 2025, the date of license termination), calculated as the percentage fee based on actual\n\n\n\n\nFINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 4\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13-1 Filed 03/13/26 Page 5 of 6 PageID 129\n\n\n revenues for those periods, estimated at $45,000, subject to adjustment based on accurate\n financial statements provided pursuant to Paragraph 25\n 2. Unpaid License Renewal Fees: $15,000 ($5,000 per year for 2023, 2024, and 2025)\n 3. Unauthorized Post-Termination Use: $10,000 for unauthorized use of the Marks during\n November and December 2025\n 4. Adjustment Provision: If the financial statements provided pursuant to Paragraph 25\n demonstrate that the actual amounts owed exceed the amounts specified in Paragraphs 27-28,\n Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol shall pay the full difference within fifteen (15)\n days of providing such statements. If the actual amounts are less than the amounts specified,\n no refund or adjustment shall be made due to Defendant's and the Individual Defendants'\n failure to timely pay license fees, failure to provide accurate financial statements, fraudulent\n concealment of revenues, and intentional unauthorized use of the Marks following termination\n 5. Net Present Value of Future License Fees: The net present value of all License Fees that\n would have become due under the License Agreement had Defendant not defaulted, calculated\n through the original term of the License Agreement\n 6. Fraud Damages: Such additional actual damages as proven at trial resulting from the\n fraudulent conduct of Anthony Schlur and Patrick Dussol, including but not limited to\n damages for harm to Plaintiff's business reputation, goodwill, and trademark value\n 7. Exemplary Damages: Pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code \u00a7 41.003,\n exemplary damages in an amount to be determined by the Court based on the fraudulent\n conduct of Anthony Schlur and Patrick Dussol\n 8. Treble Damages: Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1117, and based on the willful and intentional nature\n of Defendant's and the Individual Defendants' trademark infringement, all damages awarded\n under Paragraphs 27-29 and 32 for trademark infringement, business dilution, and unfair\n competition are trebled.\n 9. Statutory Damages: After an accurate accounting and after Defendant provides all financial\n records, Plaintiff\n 10. Attorney's Fees and Costs: All reasonable and necessary attorney's fees and costs incurred\n by Plaintiff in connection with this action, as provided by 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1117, Texas Civil\n Practice and Remedies Code \u00a7 38.001, and the parties' License Agreement, in an amount not\n less than $22,434.50, or an amount to be determined by the Court upon submission of\n appropriate documentation.\n\nFINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 5\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 13-1 Filed 03/13/26 Page 6 of 6 PageID 130\n\n\nCompliance Reporting\n\n IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:\n\n 1. Within ten (10) days after entry of this Final Judgment, Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and\n Patrick Dussol shall each file with the Court and serve upon Plaintiff's counsel a separate\n written report, under oath, setting forth in detail the manner in which they have complied with\n each provision of this Order\n 2. Defendant, Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol shall file supplemental compliance reports\n every thirty (30) days until full compliance with this Order has been achieved and verified by\n Plaintiff\nPost-Judgment Discovery\n\n IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:\n\n 1. Plaintiff is entitled to conduct post-judgment discovery to identify assets of Defendant,\n Anthony Schlur, and Patrick Dussol available to satisfy this Judgment, and to verify\n compliance with the terms of this Order\n All relief not specifically granted herein is denied.\n\n SIGNED this _____ day of _________________, 2026.\n\n\n\n ________________________________\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n\n\n\n\nFINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT \u2013 PAGE 6\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:21:26.807774-07:00","document_number":"13","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"177018439090","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Proposed Order","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-05-06T07:19:44.406277-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.614909-07:00","date_filed":"2026-03-13","time_filed":null,"entry_number":13,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-03-13.001","pacer_sequence_number":30,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/453519657/","id":453519657,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/468413929/","id":468413929,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/12/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.303062-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T03:43:51.997946-07:00","sha1":"c6e83921f25f71631bfb57c94b844f00e0410683","page_count":1,"file_size":172178,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.12.0_1.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.12.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document12 Filed 12/05/25 Pagelofi PagelD 120\n\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n\nDallas Division\n\n\u00a7\n\n\u00a7\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc \u00a7\n\nPlaintiff\ny \u00a7 Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n\n\u00a7\n\n\u00a7\n\n\u00a7\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CN \u00a7\n\nDefendant \u00a7\n\nCLERK'S ENTRY OF DEFAULT\n\nThe record reflects that service of the complaint has been made upon the Defendant\nnamed below:\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC\n\nIt appears from the record that service of the complaint has been made, that the Defendant\nhas failed to answer or otherwise defend as directed within the time allowed, and that the Plaintiff\nhas shown that failure through affidavit or otherwise.\n\nTherefore, upon Plaintiff's request, DEFAULT is entered against the Defendant\nnamed above.\n\nKAREN S. MITCHELL, CLERK\nU.S. DISTRICT COURT\n\nBy: Gel Clerk on 12/5/2025\n","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:21:13.991850-07:00","document_number":"12","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018195146","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Clerk's Entry of Default","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.271889-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.572595-07:00","date_filed":"2025-12-05","time_filed":null,"entry_number":12,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-12-05.001","pacer_sequence_number":28,"description":"Clerk's ENTRY OF DEFAULT as to Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC. (ykp) (Entered: 12/05/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/453519656/","id":453519656,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/468413928/","id":468413928,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/11/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.238230-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T03:43:30.605992-07:00","sha1":"01eecb2d10116ec7f93798b2d9cd4b13e0119280","page_count":4,"file_size":64872,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.11.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.11.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 11 Filed 12/04/25 Page 1 of 4 PageID 115\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff \u00a7\n \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n v. \u00a7\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE\n \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC,\n \u00a7\n Defendant \u00a7\n \u00a7\n \u00a7\n\n PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR CLERK\u2019S ENTRY OF DEFAULT\n\nTo the Clerk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas:\n\n Pursuant to Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff, Spaghetti\n\n Warehouse Restaurants, Inc, requests that the Clerk of this Honorable Court enter the Default of\n\n Defendant, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC, for failure to plead or otherwise\n\n defend as provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and as supported from the declaration\n\n of Casey S. Erick, Esq., attached hereto.\n\n\nDATED: December 4, 2025. LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP\n\n\n\n Casey S. Erick\n TX State Bar No. 24028564\n 2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2000\n Dallas, Texas 75201\n Telephone: 214.722.7107\n Fax: 214.722.7111\n Casey.Erick@lewisbrisbois.com\n\n\n\n\n168050854.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT \u2013 PAGE 1\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 11 Filed 12/04/25 Page 2 of 4 PageID 116\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n The undersigned does hereby certify that on the 4th day of December 2025, the foregoing\n\ndocument was served electronically with a copy of the pleading through use of the Court\u2019s CM/\n\nECF system and/or mailing it to the last known address of counsel and or parties:\n\n Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC\n Anthony N. Schlur, Esq.\n 125 Park Avenue, 12th Floor\n New York, NY 10017\n ______________________________\n CASEY S. ERICK\n\n\n\n\n168050854.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT \u2013 PAGE 2\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 11 Filed 12/04/25 Page 3 of 4 PageID 117\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\n RESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff \u00a7\n \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n v. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE\n \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\n RESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC,\n \u00a7\n Defendant \u00a7\n \u00a7\n \u00a7\n\n DECLARATION OF CASEY S. ERICK IN SUPPORT OF\n PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT\n\n Casey S. Erick, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1746, hereby declares as follows:\n\n 1. I am over 18 years of age, of sound mind, and otherwise competent to make this\n\nDeclaration. The evidence set out in the foregoing Declaration is based on my personal knowledge\n\n 2. I am counsel for Plaintiff, and submit this Declaration in support of Plaintiff\u2019s\n\nRequest for Entry of Default.\n\n 3. On October 7, 2025, Plaintiff filed its Complaint for Permanent and Injunctive\n\nRelief, Damages and Other Relief. [Doc. 1].\n\n 4. On October 8, 2025, the Court issued a Summons as to Defendant, Spaghetti\n\nWarehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC. [Doc. 6].\n\n 5. On October 27, 2025 in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, Defendant was served\n\nand the Return of Service was filed on November 12, 2025. [Doc. 8].\n\n 6. The Defendant is owned and operated by New York Attorney, Anthony J. Schlur,\n\nEsq., of the law firm, Goldberg Weprin Finkel Goldstein, LLP, located at 1501 Broadway, 22nd\n\n\n\n\n168050854.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT \u2013 PAGE 3\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 11 Filed 12/04/25 Page 4 of 4 PageID 118\n\n\n\nFloor, New York, New York 10036, and by Connecticut Attorney, Patrick J. Dussol, Esq., Assistant\n\nGeneral Counsel - Real Estate at Hut 8 Corp., located at 1101 Brickell Ave, N-1500, Miami, FL\n\n33131.\n\n 7. Since being served, Plaintiff\u2019s counsel has had substantive discussions with both\n\nMr. Schlur and Mr. Dussol regarding this lawsuit.\n\n 8. Pursuant to Rule 12(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant\n\nwas required to file an answer or other responsive pleading within 21 days after being served.\n\nBecause service was effected on October 27, 2025, Defendant's answer or other responsive\n\npleading was due on or before November 17, 2025.\n\n 9. To date, Defendant has failed to file an answer or other responsive pleading within\n\nthe time required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i).\n\n 10. Defendant is not an infant, incompetent person, in active military service of the\n\nUnited States of America or its officers or agents.\n\n I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.\n\n Executed on December 5, 2025.\n\n _____________________________\n CASEY S. ERICK\n\n\n\n\n168050854.1 PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT \u2013 PAGE 4\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:20:11.388425-07:00","document_number":"11","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018194075","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Request for Clerk to Issue Document","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/471279522/","id":471279522,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/11/1/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-03-09T09:11:22.426040-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T06:17:55.299508-07:00","sha1":"946ed6501abca2ea6b34aeef91d7deec409fb0aa","page_count":1,"file_size":26336,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.11.1.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.11.1.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:25-cv-02727-E Document 11-1 Filed 12/04/25 Page 1 of 1 PageID 119\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. \u00a7\n \u00a7\n Plaintiff \u00a7\n \u00a7 CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n v. \u00a7\n \u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE\n \u00a7 JURY DEMANDED\nRESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC,\n \u00a7\n Defendant \u00a7\n \u00a7\n \u00a7\n\n ORDER ON PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR CLERK\u2019S ENTRY OF DEFAULT\n\n Plaintiff, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc., by and through the undersigned, having\n\nfiled with this Court its Request for Clerk\u2019s Entry of Default and the Court having reviewed same,\n\nhereby ORDERS:\n\n An entry of Default shall be entered against the Defendant, Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant\n\nof CNY, LLC.\n\n Executed on _____________________________.\n\n _____________________________\n U.S. DISTRICT COURT CLERK\n\n\n\n\n168052052.1 ORDER ON PLAINTIFF\u2019S REQUEST FOR CLERK\u2019S ENTRY OF DEFAULT \u2013 Solo\nPage\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:20:40.302779-07:00","document_number":"11","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"177018194076","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Proposed Order","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.206771-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.527657-07:00","date_filed":"2025-12-04","time_filed":null,"entry_number":11,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-12-04.001","pacer_sequence_number":26,"description":"Request for Clerk to issue Entry of Default filed by Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Erick, Casey) (Entered: 12/04/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/453519655/","id":453519655,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/468413927/","id":468413927,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/10/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.173063-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.507706-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"10","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Motion to Substitute Attorney","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.139989-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.484575-07:00","date_filed":"2025-11-14","time_filed":null,"entry_number":10,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-11-14.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 9 Unopposed Motion to Withdraw. Attorney William L. Siegel, of Cowles & Thompson, P.C. terminated. (Ordered by Judge Ada Brown on 11/14/2025) (chmb) (Entered: 11/14/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/453519654/","id":453519654,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/468413926/","id":468413926,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/9/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.107124-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T03:43:28.188377-07:00","sha1":"4c10e435a0f1b06d558bb5682f22b8ca0f64f90c","page_count":2,"file_size":39837,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.9.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.9.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:19:57.520982-07:00","document_number":"9","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018142919","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Motion to Substitute Attorney","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.076994-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.403893-07:00","date_filed":"2025-11-13","time_filed":null,"entry_number":9,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-11-13.001","pacer_sequence_number":22,"description":"MOTION to Substitute Attorney, added attorney Casey S Erick,Casey S Erick for Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc. Motion filed by Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc (Erick, Casey) (Entered: 11/13/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/453519653/","id":453519653,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/468413925/","id":468413925,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/8/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.044157-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-08T03:46:33.349714-07:00","sha1":"c3d90cca1a1e725ec2d3f1308df07a687dc2d48c","page_count":3,"file_size":1499727,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.8.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141/gov.uscourts.txnd.410141.8.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3\u00b025-cv-02727-E Document8 Filed 11/12/25 Pagelof3 PagelD 110\n\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n\nfor the \\\n\nNORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE \u00a7\nRESTAURANTS, INC. DALLAS DIVISION,\n\u00a7\nPlaintiff(s), \u00a7\n\nv. \u00a7 Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n\u00a7\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE RESTAURANT \u00a7\nOF CNY, LLC, \u00a7\n\u00a7\nDefendant(s). \u00a7\n\nRETURN OF SERVICE\n\nCame to my hand on Friday, October 17, 2025 at 3:08 PM,\n\nExecuted at: 125 PARK AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR, NEW YORK, NY 10017\nat 1:57 PM, on Monday, October 27, 2025,\n\nby delivering to the within named:\n\nSPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE RESTAURANT OF CNY, LLC\nby personally delivering to Legal Counsel, ANTHONY N. SCHLUR, ESQ.\na true copy of this\n\nSUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION, COMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT\nINJUNCTIVE RELIEF, DAMAGES, AND OTHER RELIEF with UNSWORN DECLARATION\nIN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER and PLAINTIFF\u2019S\nMOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION\n\nBEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared ROBERT URENA who after being duly sworn\non oath states: \"My name is ROBERT URENA. I am a person not less than eighteen (18) years of age and I am competent\nto make this oath. | am a resident of the State of New York. I have personal knowledge of the facts and statements\ncontained herein and aver that each is true and correct. | am not a party to nor related or affiliated with any party to this\nsuit. | have no interest in the outcome of the suit. | have never been convicted of a felony or of a misdemeanor involving\nmoral turpitude.\n\nBy. (KL\n\nROBERT URENA - Process Server\n\nSubscribed and Sworn to by ROBERT URENA, Before Me, the undersigned authority, on this\n\nsie day of October, 2025.\n\nNotary Public in and for the State of New York\n\nPEDRO J RODRIGUEZ\nNotary Public, State of New York\nRegistration No. 01R06415136\nQualified in Queens oe\nCommission Expires 03/08/2 2q\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document8 Filed 11/12/25 Page2of3 PagelD 111\nCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document6 Filed 10/08/25 Pagelof2 PagelD 106\n\nAO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action _\n\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n\nfor the\nNorthern District of Texas\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc\nOe Plaintiff \u2014\n\nVv.\n\nCivil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n\nSpaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY\nLLC\n\n\"Defendant\n\n)\n)\n)\n)\n)\n)\n)\n\nSummons in a Civil Action\n\nTO: Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC\n\nA lawsuit has been filed against you.\n\nWithin 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received\nit) -- or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or\nemployee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2) or (3) -- you must serve\non the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal\nRules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or the\nplaintiff's attorney, whose name and address are:\n\nCasey Erick\n901 Main Street, Suite 3900\nDallas , TX 75202\n\nIf you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief\ndemanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.\n\nCLERK OF COURT EBD\n\n>\u00bb\n\nSignature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk Ny ere .\n\n\fCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document8 Filed 11/12/25 Page3of3 PagelD 112\nCase 3:25-cv-02727-E Document6 Filed 10/08/25 Page2of2 PagelD 107\n\nAO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)\n\nCivil Action No. 3:25-cv-02727-E\n\nPROOF OF SERVICE\n(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 ())\n\nThis summons for (name of individual and title, if any)\n\nwas received by me on (date)\n\n[I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)\n\non (date) ;\n\n[I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name)\n\nor\n\n, aperson of suitable age and discretion who resides there,\n\non (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or\n\n[I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is designated\n\nby law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)\n\non (date) > or\n[I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or\n[other (specify)\nMy fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $\n\nI declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.\n\nDate:\n\nServer's signature\n\nPrinted name and title\n\nServer's address\n\nAdditional information regarding attempted service, etc:\n","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-05-06T07:19:48.758104-07:00","document_number":"8","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018141862","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Summons Returned","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-02-11T10:24:03.007460-08:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.318135-07:00","date_filed":"2025-11-12","time_filed":null,"entry_number":8,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-11-12.001","pacer_sequence_number":20,"description":"SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC; served on 10/27/2025. (kcr) (Entered: 11/13/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/444125870/","id":444125870,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/458786286/","id":458786286,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2025-11-14T09:18:49.843580-08:00","date_modified":"2025-11-14T09:18:49.852797-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Motion to Substitute Attorney","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-11-14T09:18:49.820985-08:00","date_modified":"2025-11-14T09:18:49.820997-08:00","date_filed":"2025-11-14","time_filed":"10:15:53","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-11-14.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/442590796/","id":442590796,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204956/","id":457204956,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/7/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:10.869439-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.261933-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"7","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018101536","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Change of Address","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:10.593936-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.245458-07:00","date_filed":"2025-10-28","time_filed":null,"entry_number":7,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-10-28.001","pacer_sequence_number":18,"description":"NOTICE of Change of Address for Attorney Casey S Erick on behalf of Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc. (Filer confirms contact info in ECF is current.) (Erick, Casey) (Entered: 10/28/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/442590795/","id":442590795,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204955/","id":457204955,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/6/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:10.419835-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.223829-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"6","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018053149","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Summons Issued","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:10.155953-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.196888-07:00","date_filed":"2025-10-08","time_filed":null,"entry_number":6,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-10-08.002","pacer_sequence_number":16,"description":"Summons Issued as to Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY LLC. (knb) (Entered: 10/08/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/442590794/","id":442590794,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204954/","id":457204954,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/5/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:09.779438-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.077265-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"5","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018053056","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Report to Patent/Trademark or Copyright Office","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:09.584709-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:20:00.037823-07:00","date_filed":"2025-10-08","time_filed":null,"entry_number":5,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-10-08.001","pacer_sequence_number":14,"description":"Report to Patent/Trademark Office of Initiating Document. Form AO 120 e-mailed to notice_of_suit@uspto.gov. (knb) (Entered: 10/08/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/442590793/","id":442590793,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204953/","id":457204953,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/4/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:09.311362-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.988779-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"4","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Cert. Of Interested Persons/Disclosure Statement","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:08.901928-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.967068-07:00","date_filed":"2025-10-07","time_filed":null,"entry_number":4,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-10-07.004","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants Inc. (Clerk QC note: No affiliate entered in ECF). **See document [1-6] for image.** (knb) (Entered: 10/08/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/442590792/","id":442590792,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204952/","id":457204952,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/3/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:08.606483-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.934487-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"3","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018052978","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Judge Brown","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:07.921517-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.913117-07:00","date_filed":"2025-10-07","time_filed":null,"entry_number":3,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-10-07.003","pacer_sequence_number":10,"description":"New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Horan). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (knb) (Entered: 10/08/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/442590791/","id":442590791,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204951/","id":457204951,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/2/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:06.418923-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.876436-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"2","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051495","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Motion for TRO","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457205198/","id":457205198,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/2/1/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:26:14.594968-07:00","date_modified":"2026-03-09T09:05:42.979420-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":3,"file_size":715272,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"2","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051496","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Declaration(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457205199/","id":457205199,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/2/2/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:26:14.905719-07:00","date_modified":"2026-03-09T09:05:43.020868-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":7,"file_size":369680,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"2","attachment_number":2,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051497","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457205200/","id":457205200,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/2/3/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:26:14.955741-07:00","date_modified":"2026-03-09T09:05:43.056630-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":1,"file_size":181119,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"2","attachment_number":3,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051498","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457205201/","id":457205201,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/2/4/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:26:15.008731-07:00","date_modified":"2026-03-09T09:05:43.084990-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":6,"file_size":218736,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"2","attachment_number":4,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051499","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457205202/","id":457205202,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/2/5/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:26:15.093116-07:00","date_modified":"2026-03-09T09:05:43.110448-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":3,"file_size":124129,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"2","attachment_number":5,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051500","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Proposed Order","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:05.975425-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.856026-07:00","date_filed":"2025-10-07","time_filed":null,"entry_number":2,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-10-07.002","pacer_sequence_number":8,"description":"MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction filed by Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc (Attachments: # 1 Declaration(s), # 2 Exhibit(s), # 3 Exhibit(s), # 4 Exhibit(s), # 5 Proposed Order) (Erick, Casey) Modified text on 10/8/2025 (knb). (Entered: 10/07/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/440233466/","id":440233466,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/71574995/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/454785206/","id":454785206,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/1/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-07T15:20:52.782613-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.826917-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"1","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051428","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Complaint","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204981/","id":457204981,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/1/1/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.367553-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.367571-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":3,"file_size":715272,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"1","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051429","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Declaration(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204983/","id":457204983,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/1/2/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.453454-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.453474-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":7,"file_size":369680,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"1","attachment_number":2,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051430","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204984/","id":457204984,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/1/3/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.477841-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.477862-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":1,"file_size":181119,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"1","attachment_number":3,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051431","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204985/","id":457204985,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/1/4/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.498668-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.498688-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":6,"file_size":218736,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"1","attachment_number":4,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051432","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit(s)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204986/","id":457204986,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/1/5/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.524064-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.524099-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":2,"file_size":241013,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"1","attachment_number":5,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051433","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Cover Sheet","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/457204987/","id":457204987,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/71574995/1/6/spaghetti-warehouse-restaurants-inc-v-spaghetti-warehouse-restaurant-of/","date_created":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.545547-07:00","date_modified":"2025-10-30T10:22:50.545566-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":2,"file_size":133128,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"1","attachment_number":6,"pacer_doc_id":"177018051434","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Certficate of Interested Parties","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-10-07T15:20:52.760798-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-06T07:19:59.806591-07:00","date_filed":"2025-10-07","time_filed":"16:59:35","entry_number":1,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-10-07.001","pacer_sequence_number":5,"description":"COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurant of CNY, LLC filed by Spaghetti Warehouse Restaurants, Inc. (Filing fee $405; Receipt number ATXNDC-15896682) Clerk to issue summons(es). In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the Judges Copy Requirements and Judge Specific Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration(s), # 2 Exhibit(s), # 3 Exhibit(s), # 4 Exhibit(s), # 5 Cover Sheet, # 6 Certficate of Interested Parties) (Erick, Casey) (Entered: 10/07/2025)","tags":[]}],"entries_total":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/?count=on&docket=71574995&page_size=40"}