2025-cv-04645 +组团 近期案件➥ 订阅
原告律所：HSP
品牌：Anne Stokes 精灵独角兽
小提示：专注TRO和解/应诉，需要起诉文件/被告名单/其他帮助可联系我们，微信右上角“···”可全文翻译/分享找队友/订阅可自动推送此案最新进展
微信扫码联系我们
| # | Date | Description |
| 38 |
08/22/2025
|
MEMORANDUM by Art Ask Agency Plaintiff's Memorandum in Response to the August 7, 2025 Order [Dkt. No. 38] 翻译 |
| 37 |
08/07/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff is directed to file a supplemental brief (not to exceed 10 pages) by 8/22/2025, explaining the basis for personal jurisdiction over defendant. On 8/5/2025, plaintiff moved for entry of default and default judgment against defendant. 35. "Before a court can enter a default judgment, however, it must be satisfied that it has personal jurisdiction over the defendants." Simonsen v. Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago, No. 01 C 3081, 2002 WL 230777, at *15 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 14, 2002) (citation omitted). That is because "this Court cannot enter a default judgment against a party over whom it lacks personal jurisdiction." Pardo v. Mecum Auction, Inc., No. 12 C 08410, 2014 WL 627690, at *8 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 18, 2014); see also Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Does 1-55, No. 11-cv-10, 2011 WL 2036454, at *2 (N.D. Ill. May 24, 2011) ("To enter a default judgment against one or more of the Defendants, the Court must have personal jurisdiction." (citing Relational, LLC v. Hodges, 627 F.3d 668, 671 (7th Cir. 2010))); Barry v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 410 F.Supp.3d 161, 171 (D.D.C. Sept. 4, 2019) ("The court must also 'satisfy itself that it has personal jurisdiction before entering judgment against an absent defendant.'" (quoting Mwani v. bin Laden, 417 F.3d 1, 6-7 (D.C. Cir. 2005))). The Seventh Circuit has, in some cases, found the existence of specific personal jurisdiction in trademark, copyright, and patent infringement suits against online retailers, but only when the defendant has shipped the allegedly infringing products to the forum state. See, e.g., NBA Props., Inc. v. HANWJH, 46 F.4th 614, 622-23 (7th Cir. 2022); Curry v. Revolution Lab'ys, LLC, 949 F.3d 385, 399 (7th Cir. 2020); Illinois v. Hemi Group, LLC, 622 F.3d 754, 758 (7th Cir. 2010). Absent fulfillment and shipment of an order into the forum state, the operation of an "interactive" online storefront is insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction. See Advanced Tactical Ordnance Sys., LLC v. Real Action Paintball, Inc., 751 F.3d 796, 803 (7th Cir. 2014) ("Having an interactive website. should not open a defendant up to personal jurisdiction in every spot on the planet where that interactive website is accessible."). Here, the complaint alleges that "Defendant has targeted sales from Illinois residents by operating an online store that offers shipping to the United States, including, Illinois, [and] accepts payment in U.S. dollars." 20 para. 2. However, "displaying products online that are shippable to Illinois amounts to nothing more than maintaining an interactive website that is accessible in Illinois. That alone cannot confer personal jurisdiction." Rubik's Brand, Ltd. v. P'ships and Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified in Schedule A, No. 20-cv-5338, 2021 WL 825668, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 4, 2021) ("The maintenance of an interactive website, without more, is insufficient to vest a court with personal jurisdiction."). Further, the complaint alleges that 'on information and belief, [defendant] has sold products bearing counterfeit versions of Plaintiff's copyrighted artwork to residents of Illinois." 20 para. 2; see id. para. 11. However, "conclusory allegations stated only upon 'information and belief,' are insufficient to establish that the court has personal jurisdiction over a defendant." Cagan v. Gadman, CV 08-3710 (SJF) (ARL), 2009 WL 10712634, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. July 6, 2009) (citation omitted). 翻译 |
| 36 |
08/05/2025
|
DECLARATION of Michael A. Hierl regarding motion for default judgment 35 翻译 |
| 35 |
08/05/2025
|
MEMORANDUM by Art Ask Agency in support of motion for default judgment 35 翻译 |
| 34 |
08/05/2025
|
MOTION by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency for default judgment as to Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default and Default Judgment Against Defendants Identified on Amended Schedule A 翻译 |
| 33 |
07/21/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's status report. 32. By 8/4/2025, plaintiff should file a status report with an update on the case. 翻译 |
| 32 |
07/14/2025
|
STATUS Report by Art Ask Agency 翻译 |
| 31 |
07/14/2025
|
CERTIFICATE of Service by Elizabeth Aubree Miller on behalf of Art Ask Agency 翻译 |
| 30 |
07/14/2025
|
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Art Ask Agency by Elizabeth Aubree Miller 翻译 |
| 29 |
07/09/2025
|
SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendant Duan Shiqi identified in the Amended Complaint 翻译 |
| 28 |
06/24/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's status report. 26. The 6/23/2025 status report deadline, 24, is stricken. By 7/15/2025, plaintiff should file a status report with an update on the status of the case. 翻译 |
| 27 |
06/20/2025
|
STATUS Report by Art Ask Agency 翻译 |
| 26 |
06/02/2025
|
ORDER Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 6/2/2025: 翻译 |
| 25 |
06/02/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for expedited discovery 23 is granted in part and denied in part. Enter Order. By 6/23/2025, plaintiff should file a status report with an update on the status of the case. 翻译 |
| 24 |
05/29/2025
|
MOTION by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency to expedite Plaintiff's Motion for Expedited Discovery 翻译 |
| 23 |
05/23/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Telephone status hearing held on 5/23/2025. Plaintiff is directed to file a joint status report by 6/20/2025 updating the court on how plaintiff seeks to proceed with this litigation. The Clerk of Court is directed to unseal document 21. 翻译 |
| 22 |
05/22/2025
|
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency Amended Schedule A 翻译 |
| 21 |
05/22/2025
|
AMENDED complaint by Art Ask Agency against The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Amended Schedule A Hereto 翻译 |
| 20 |
05/19/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: The court has received plaintiff's memorandum, 18, in response to this court's joinder show-cause order. 11. Plaintiff's request to file an amended complaint with a smaller subset of defendants and an accompanying supplemental memorandum is granted. By 5/23/2025, plaintiff should file an amended complaint and an accompanying supplemental memorandum explaining why this case should not be dismissed or severed for improper joinder. Telephone status hearing set for 5/23/2025 at 8:45 a.m. To join the telephone hearing please dial 650-479-3207 and enter access code 2315 996 7380#. Press # when prompted for an attendee number. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. 翻译 |
| 19 |
05/15/2025
|
RESPONSE by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency Memorandum in Response to Order of May 1, 2025 [Dkt. No. 11] 翻译 |
| 18 |
05/08/2025
|
EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency Exhibit 2 Part 4 to Strid Declaration regarding declaration 13 翻译 |
| 17 |
05/08/2025
|
EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency Exhibit 2 Part 3 to Strid Declaration regarding declaration 13 翻译 |
| 16 |
05/08/2025
|
EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency Exhibit 2 Part 2 to Strid Declaration regarding declaration 13 翻译 |
| 15 |
05/08/2025
|
EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency Exhibit 2 Part 1 to Strid Declaration regarding declaration 13 翻译 |
| 14 |
05/08/2025
|
DECLARATION of Maria Strid 翻译 |
| 13 |
05/01/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal, 7, is denied. Plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal so that plaintiff may obtain a temporary restraining order freezing the defendants' assets before revealing the defendants' identities. Id. at 1. "The Supreme Court has made clear that courts lack the power to issue an asset freeze at the beginning of a case, unless that party is seeking equitable monetary relief." Zorro Productions, Inc. v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto, No. 23-cv-5761, 2023 WL 8807254, at *4 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 20, 2023) (citing Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo S.A. v. All. Bond Fund, Inc., 527 U.S. 308 (1999)); see also Shenzhen Yihong Lighting Co., Ltd. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 23-cv-1560, at Dkt. 15 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 22, 2023). Indeed, "[a]s a general matter [ ] prejudgment asset restraints are not proper simply to establish a fund from which a later award of money damages can be satisfied." Id. (second alteration in original) (quoting Banister v. Firestone, No. 17-cv-8940, 2018 WL 4224444, at *9 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 5, 2018)). In Schedule A cases, plaintiffs often initially demand equitable relief in the form of an accounting of profits, but after obtaining a temporary asset freeze, plaintiffs uniformly shift their focus to demanding statutory damages. Id. at *3-4. In substance, then, if not in form, Schedule A plaintiffs seek prejudgment asset restraints to establish a fund from which money damages may be awarded. So, despite the demand in plaintiff's complaint that it be awarded defendants' profits, the court is not persuaded that plaintiff will actually seek or obtain such equitable relief-as opposed to statutory damages-in this case. See Zorro, 2023 WL 8807254, at *3-4. Thus, even if plaintiff's initial demand for an accounting of profits could provide this court with the power to issue a prejudgment asset freeze, see Grupo Mexicano, 527 U.S. at 333; Banister, 2018 WL 4224444, at *9, the court is not persuaded that such a freeze is warranted. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal, 7, is therefore denied. Plaintiff's sealed exhibit, 8, is stricken. If plaintiff wishes to proceed with this case, plaintiff must file an unredacted version of its exhibit publicly on the docket by 5/8/2025. 翻译 |
| 12 |
05/01/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: By 5/15/2025, plaintiff is ordered to show cause why this case should not be dismissed or severed for improper joinder. Plaintiff is advised of the following: First, "[o]n motion or on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party." Fed. R. Civ. P. 21(a). Second, sua sponte review of the propriety of joinder in Schedule A cases is a regular practice of courts in this district because plaintiffs "routinely file these multi-defendant cases. using cookie-cutter complaints that allege in a conclusory manner that 'on information and belief' each infringing defendant is inter-connected with the others." Viking Arm AS v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule "A", No. 24-cv-1566, 2024 WL 2953105, at *1 (N.D. Ill. June 6, 2024). Third, "[c]ourts generally find that claims against different defendants arose out of the same transaction or occurrence only if there is a logical relationship between the separate causes of action." Estee Lauder Cosms. Ltd. v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule "A", 334 F.R.D. 182, 185 (N.D. Ill. 2020) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Fourth, courts have held that "to be part of the same transaction requires shared, overlapping facts that give rise to each cause of action, and not just distinct, albeit coincidentally identical, facts." Id. (quoting In re EMC Corp., 677 F.3d 1351, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2012)). Fifth, courts have held that the allegation that multiple defendants have infringed on the same copyright or trademark in the same way "does not create the substantial evidentiary overlap required to find a similar transaction or occurrence." Roadget Bus. Pte. Ltd. v. Schedule A Defs., No. 23-cv-17036, 2024 WL 1858592, at *6 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 29, 2024) (collecting cases). Finally, courts have held that the allegation that defendants "share unique identifiers, such as design elements and similarities of the unauthorized products offered for sale," is not sufficient to establish joinder. Ilustrata Servicos Design, Ltd. v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule "A", No. 21-cv-05993, 2021 WL 5396690, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2021); Art Ask Agency v. Individuals, Corps., Ltd. Liab. Cos., P'ships, & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule "A", No. 21-cv-06197, 2021 WL 5493226, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 23, 2021). 翻译 |
| 11 |
04/29/2025
|
CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. 翻译 |
| 10 |
04/29/2025
|
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeannice W. Appenteng. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3). 翻译 |
| 9 |
04/29/2025
|
NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Art Ask Agency 翻译 |
| 8 |
04/29/2025
|
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency Sealed Schedule A 翻译 |
| 7 |
04/29/2025
|
MOTION by Plaintiff Art Ask Agency to seal document Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Under Seal 翻译 |
| 6 |
04/29/2025
|
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Art Ask Agency by John Wilson 翻译 |
| 5 |
04/29/2025
|
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Art Ask Agency by Robert Payton Mcmurray 翻译 |
| 4 |
04/29/2025
|
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Art Ask Agency by William Benjamin Kalbac 翻译 |
| 3 |
04/29/2025
|
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Art Ask Agency by Michael A. Hierl 翻译 |
| 2 |
04/29/2025
|
CIVIL Cover Sheet 翻译 |
| 1 |
04/29/2025
|
COMPLAINT filed by Art Ask Agency; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23411257. 翻译 |