Novo Nordisk A/S v. Green Care Professional Services, P.C. d/b/a Genericozempic.com

• Court: District Court, N.D. Illinois
• Decided: November 21, 2024
• Docket: 1:24-cv-04443
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

NOVO NORDISK A/S AND NOVO NORDISK INC.,

Plaintiffs, Case No. 1:24-cv-04443

v. Honorable Mary M. Rowland GREEN CARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, P.C. d/b/a GENERICOZEMPIC.COM and GCM PARTNERS, LLC, Defendants.

AGREED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT BY CONSENT Plaintiffs Novo Nordisk A/S and Novo Nordisk Inc. (“Plaintiffs”), with the agreement of Defendants Green Care Professional Services P.C. d/b/a Genericozempic.com and GCM Partners LLC (“Defendants”), respectfully move this Court to enter a final judgment in this action in favor of Plaintiffs. In support of this motion, Plaintiffs state as follows: 1. Novo Nordisk filed this Complaint on May 30, 2024 (Dkt #1) alleging trademark infringement, false advertising, and unfair competition in violation of sections 32(l) and 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1) and 1125(a), common law, and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. 2. The parties have agreed to a confidential settlement agreement to resolve Plaintiffs’ claims. 3. Attached as Exhibit A is Defendants’ signed consent to the proposed final judgment and permanent injunction (“Final Judgment”). Upon entry of the Final Judgment, this matter will be resolved in full.

4. This Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing the parties’ settlement agreement, the Final Judgment, and as otherwise provided in the Final Judgment.1 CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, the parties respectfully move this Court to enter the attached

Final Judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants. DATED: November 21, 2024 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Suyash Agrawal /s/ Sondra A. Hemeryck Suyash Agrawal Sondra A. Hemeryck MASSEY & GAIL LLP RILEY SAFER HOLMES & CANCILA LLP 50 E Washington St., Ste. 400 1 S. Dearborn Street, Suite 2200 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 379-0949 (312) 471-8700 sagrawal@masseygail.com shemeryck@rshc-law.com

1 “When a court issues an injunction, it automatically retains jurisdiction to enforce it”. Hyzy v. Baker, No. 18-CV- 5276, 2019 WL 2576533, at *4 (N.D. Ill. June 24, 2019) citing United States v. Fisher, 864 F.2d 434, 436 (7th Cir. 1988).