Dorna Sports, S.L. v. The Individuals, et al., No. 24 CV 11676, (N.D. Ill. Sept. 11, 2025) (Coleman, J.).

Judge Coleman entered default but denied default judgment in this Schedule A trademark case, finding that plaintiff Dorna Sports failed to establish a legitimate cause of action despite defendants’ default. The Court held that conclusory allegations of consumer confusion, without any facts explaining how consumers would be deceived, cannot support a trademark infringement claim—even against defaulting defendants.

Dorna Sports, organizer of the MOTOGP motorcycle championship, alleged that defendants sold counterfeit products using its registered MOTOGP trademarks. While the Court accepted the well-pleaded allegations regarding liability as true upon entry of default, it found that Dorna failed to provide any factual basis for its consumer confusion claims. The plaintiff repeatedly asserted that defendants’ use of the trademarks caused consumer confusion, but provided no facts explaining how or why consumers would be deceived.

Most significantly, the Court noted that Dorna never identified or described its own genuine products that consumers might confuse with the counterfeit items. Despite using the term “MOTOGP Products” across its pleadings, Dorna never defined or identified what the products actually were. Without information about the legitimate products, the Court could not evaluate whether defendants’ use of the trademarks was likely to cause confusion—a required element for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act claims.

The Court ordered the release of all frozen assets and directed Dorna to relay the order to all implicated third-party platforms.