Maddry

Maddry v. Luoxue

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 14, 20255:25-cv-02449California2,974 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 DANIEL M. MADDRY, Case No. 5:25-cv-02449-BLF

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING EX PARTE

v. APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY

RESTRAINING ORDER

LUOXUE, et al., [Re: Dkt. No. 2] Defendants.

12 Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Daniel Maddry’s Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Request for Expedited Relief, which was filed in combination with the Complaint in this action on March 11, 2025. Dkt. No. 2 (“TRO App.”). For the following reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s application. I. BACKGROUND This case concerns Plaintiff’s original creative work entitled “Discernment,” a card game. Dkt. No. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶ 1. Plaintiff, an individual residing in California, asserts that he is the sole owner of the game, and that it is “a creative work protected under United States copyright law.” Id. ¶ 6. He also alleges that he holds the registered trademark for the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.