1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 GS HOLISTIC, LLC, No. 2:22-cv-02086-WBS-CSK 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. (ECF No. 59.) 12 WALEED SMOKE SHOP INC d/b/a SMOKER’S GIFT SHOP, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 On July 22, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No. 59), 16 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 17 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. On August 5, 2025, plaintiff GS 18 Holistic, LLC filed objections to the findings and recommendations (ECF No. 60), including 19 objecting that the First Amended Complaint sufficiently states a claim for trademark 20 counterfeiting and infringement under

and false designation of origin and unfair 21 competition under

(a). (ECF No. 60 at 1-4.) Plaintiff further objects that 22 dismissal of this action without leave to amend is inappropriate. (Id. at 4.) The Court has 23 considered all objections raised. 24 In accordance with

(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review. 25 As part of the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations, she has included a discussion of 26 those cases previously filed by plaintiff GS Holistic in this district based on similar allegations. It 27 appears that although at least a dozen such cases have been filed, each against a different 28 defendant, in none of those cases has the defendant who was properly served made an 1 | appearance. In other words, none of the defendants in those cases have cared enough about the 2 | lawsuit against them to bother to respond. 3 It appears that in six of those cases, even though the motion for default judgment was 4 | unopposed, the assigned district judges adopted the magistrate judges’ findings and 5 || recommendations to deny plaintiff’s motions for default judgment. It further appears, however, 6 | that in the remaining six of those cases the magistrate judge recommended default judgment be 7 | entered, and the assigned district judge adopted the magistrate judges’ findings and 8 || recommendations. In one of those cases, GS Holistic, LLC v. Unlimited Smoke and Vape 9 | Paradise, et al., No. 2:22-cv-2037 WBS CKD,

(E.D. Cal. July 12, 2024), I was 10 | the district judge and I adopted the findings and recommendations of Magistrate Judge Delaney to 11 | grant the motion for default judgment but deny plaintiffs request for injunctive relief and award 12 | plaintiff costs of only $565.20. At that time, I did not have the benefit of Judge Kim’s reasoned 13 || analysis in this case. 14 The court has carefully reviewed the file, including plaintiffs objections, and finds the 15 | findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. In light of 16 | Judge Kim’s analysis of the merits of plaintiff's claim, the court now reconsiders its decision in 17 | the Unlimited Smoke and Vape Paradise case and finds in this case that plaintiff has failed to 18 | satisfy the second and third Eitel factors. The court therefore concludes that it is appropriate to 19 | adopt the findings and recommendations in full. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 21 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 59) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 22 2. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment (ECF No. 52) is DENIED; 23 3. The First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 25) is DISMISSED without leave to 24 amend; and 25 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this action. 26 44 td □ ak. 1d 7 Dated: September 24, 2025 WILLIAMB.SHUBB © 28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE